Data isn’t a Map or is it Vice Versa
Update 3: It appears this is a total FS effort to sell PDFs using Avenza. I talked with Avenza and they said that the FS is just a client of theirs using the marketplace.
Update 2: There is a free method here:
https://twitter.com/oeon/status/405752155979526144
https://twitter.com/oeon/status/405755593605926912
You’ll need to scroll to the bottom of that raster page because the retro image map doesn’t work with touch devices. The links are at the bottom.
Update: Well this is interesting, read this statement on the PDF marketplace.
A current printed copy of the Forest MVUM is available FREE from local Forest Service offices, and the current downloadable copy is available FREE from www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/ohv_maps.shtml
So the only thing here is the FS is promoting a 3rd party marketplace (well besides not bothering to create hyperlinks). The whole thing is completely weird. Why would the FS put out a press release promoting awesome PDF mobile mapping when it’s a 3rd party effort? Why not just point to the data for free online and be done with it? I’m completely confused here as to why the FS would even bother. Clue me in folks!
Interesting thoughts in the comments about PDF mobile maps being less than awesome:
I think there is some confusion here about the difference between data and maps. …… The maps built from this data (and other data) are a different product; maps are designed with a certain audience in mind and serve a specific purpose.
I don’t give a SHIT about the open data! We’ve got $500 million in the case, and 20 tonnes of mobile PDF pure IN THE TANKERS!
I’ve been chewing on this for a while since that comment was posted. Ignoring that I feel charging for digital data is (despite quoting some USDA regulation) offensive to me, I can’t really disagree with this statement. Does providing the data for free absolve any of the implications of charging citizens for data they have already paid for?
If I put my old data marketplace hat on, the other part of this all that bothers me is the federal government is picking Avenza (or whatever they are called) to sell their maps for them. Quote whatever regulation you want, this stinks. You can have our maps as long as you pay some 3rd party for them? Tell me how that isn’t bad for the consumer?
Data isn’t a Map or is it Vice Versa
Update 3: It appears this is a total FS effort to sell PDFs using Avenza. I talked with Avenza and they said that the FS is just a client of theirs using the marketplace.
Update 2: There is a free method here:
https://twitter.com/oeon/status/405752155979526144
https://twitter.com/oeon/status/405755593605926912
You’ll need to scroll to the bottom of that raster page because the retro image map doesn’t work with touch devices. The links are at the bottom.
Update: Well this is interesting, read this statement on the PDF marketplace.
A current printed copy of the Forest MVUM is available FREE from local Forest Service offices, and the current downloadable copy is available FREE from www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/ohv/ohv_maps.shtml
So the only thing here is the FS is promoting a 3rd party marketplace (well besides not bothering to create hyperlinks). The whole thing is completely weird. Why would the FS put out a press release promoting awesome PDF mobile mapping when it’s a 3rd party effort? Why not just point to the data for free online and be done with it? I’m completely confused here as to why the FS would even bother. Clue me in folks!
Interesting thoughts in the comments about PDF mobile maps being less than awesome:
I think there is some confusion here about the difference between data and maps. …… The maps built from this data (and other data) are a different product; maps are designed with a certain audience in mind and serve a specific purpose.
I don’t give a SHIT about the open data! We’ve got $500 million in the case, and 20 tonnes of mobile PDF pure IN THE TANKERS!
I’ve been chewing on this for a while since that comment was posted. Ignoring that I feel charging for digital data is (despite quoting some USDA regulation) offensive to me, I can’t really disagree with this statement. Does providing the data for free absolve any of the implications of charging citizens for data they have already paid for?
If I put my old data marketplace hat on, the other part of this all that bothers me is the federal government is picking Avenza (or whatever they are called) to sell their maps for them. Quote whatever regulation you want, this stinks. You can have our maps as long as you pay some 3rd party for them? Tell me how that isn’t bad for the consumer?
Like You Need Any Proof Python Is It
It seems like just yesterday I was talking about manipulating rasters with Python. No matter, if you’re still not convinced to embrace Python, here is some great holiday time reading for you:
How Python became the language of choice for data science
Nowadays Python is probably the programming language of choice (besides R) for data scientists for prototyping, visualization, and running data analyses on small and medium sized data sets. And rightly so, I think, given the large number of available tools (just look at the list at the top of this article).
R you say?
Python Displacing R As The Programming Language For Data Science
While R has traditionally been the programming language of choice for data scientists, it is quickly ceding ground to Python.
While there are several reasons for the shift, perhaps the biggest one is that Python is general purpose and comparatively easy to learn whereas R remains a somewhat complex programming environment to master.
Common theme huh? Python is easy to learn. If you ever find yourself reminiscing the days when you used ARC/INFO at the command line to do all your processing and are tired of GUI tools constricting your creativity and productivity, embrace Python.
One language to rule them all…
Like You Need Any Proof Python Is It
It seems like just yesterday I was talking about manipulating rasters with Python. No matter, if you’re still not convinced to embrace Python, here is some great holiday time reading for you:
How Python became the language of choice for data science
Nowadays Python is probably the programming language of choice (besides R) for data scientists for prototyping, visualization, and running data analyses on small and medium sized data sets. And rightly so, I think, given the large number of available tools (just look at the list at the top of this article).
R you say?
Python Displacing R As The Programming Language For Data Science
While R has traditionally been the programming language of choice for data scientists, it is quickly ceding ground to Python.
While there are several reasons for the shift, perhaps the biggest one is that Python is general purpose and comparatively easy to learn whereas R remains a somewhat complex programming environment to master.
Common theme huh? Python is easy to learn. If you ever find yourself reminiscing the days when you used ARC/INFO at the command line to do all your processing and are tired of GUI tools constricting your creativity and productivity, embrace Python.
One language to rule them all…