Conclusions on Geolocation

1,391 views
1,290 views

Published on

One of presentations given in "Where's the University?": building an institutional geolocation service: Janet McKnight and Sebastian Rahtz, Oxford University Computing Services- parallel session given at Institutional Web Management Workshop 2009, University of Essex, 28 - 30, July 2009

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,391
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
33
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Conclusions on Geolocation

  1. 1. Conclusions Sebastian Rahtz and Janet McKnight July 2009
  2. 2. Physical mapping Google and Microsoft and all the mapping companies are getting better all the time, but we think physical location collection will be needed for a few years yet.
  3. 3. Time and politics The time and political dimensions of geolocation must always rely on specialist local knowledge
  4. 4. Joining up the dots Integration with local data sources depends on knowledge of institutional data identifiers
  5. 5. Thank you • mailto:erewhon@oucs.ox.ac.uk • http://erewhon.oucs.ox.ac.uk • http://oxforderewhon.wordpress.com

×