>>>I'm sure there's a wonderfull mural somewhere in a wind temple of the
>>>view from the top of Kero Fin, but it would hardly be what we nowadays
>>>would call an accurate map.
Me>>So what? The Map of the London Underground has no geographical
>>accuracy but it is very accurate for conveying the needed information
>>- hence it is an accurate map. An accurate map _need_not_ be an
>>ordinance survey map.
>Perhaps if you'd read the rest of the paragraph (which you snipped from
>the above quote)
I've snipped it again (just to hack you off ) and restate my point that accuracy is a function of _need_. By focussing upon our standards of accurate maps ('it is hardly what we call an accurate map'), you obscure the fact that the map is for the use of the people who made it and is accurate enough for their purposes. Does an Orlanthi actually know that the panoramic Kerofin map is inaccurate? Are you horrified by the inaccuracy in the Mercator maps which depict Greenland the size of Australia?
>I'm interested in gloranthan maps similar in quality and form to
>Pythagoras' map of the mediterranean and the medieval portolanos.
But your article claimed to be speaking about _all_ maps and contained several unspoken assumptions.
Powered by hypermail