I've been thinking about how to get the best value from the maps.
Rather than accessing geographical data via the daily sittings, it
would be good to be able to access it independently. So, for example,
could the place name data for (say) a year or a decade be aggregated
to produce a more detailed map, and one which might have multiple
links for some towns if they are mentioned more than once during that
period? My thinking here is that if I'm interested in villages in
Bedfordshire or parts of London the maps don't currently help me
unless I happen to get lucky by opening the map for a relevant day.
It would be good to get some help from the local history community: I
will try to find some contacts on this.
It was always pretty obvious that what you've described would be the
normal usage pattern for maps. It's just that - well - the geographic
element is clearly *extremely* skeletal. We certainly do want a way to
search for a geographic term directly. It'll take a bit of fancy
footwork, but it's doable.
We should talk.
On Jan 5, 11:01 am, Edward <tande.w...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I've been thinking about how to get the best value from the maps.
> Rather than accessing geographical data via the daily sittings, it
> would be good to be able to access it independently. So, for example,
> could the place name data for (say) a year or a decade be aggregated
> to produce a more detailed map, and one which might have multiple
> links for some towns if they are mentioned more than once during that
> period? My thinking here is that if I'm interested in villages in
> Bedfordshire or parts of London the maps don't currently help me
> unless I happen to get lucky by opening the map for a relevant day.
> It would be good to get some help from the local history community: I
> will try to find some contacts on this.
