https://viewer.allmaps.org/?url=https://annotations.allmaps.org/images/d7e517545c04f551
This process definitely changed my understanding of the spation DH projects that we have looked at before. It’s nice to see the basic mechanics of how projects were built. Even with such a basic example like the one I worked on, I feel like I was able to gain a decent amount of insight into the history of Northfield and how it has changed over time. The process was relatively simple, too, which is great because it means lots of people can add their own maps and put their own ideas out there.
I can access my rectified map in JSON, Web Map Service, and a third part GIS service. I imagine that once I have a fully finished georectified map, I could see much more integration with the data that would lead to accurate measurements and more spatial queries. Next steps would proabably include saving, exporting, and sharing the information to whatever page/people are interested in the data. That could just include posting it to the Web.
We already touched on this, but one potential problem that I see with georeferencing is the likelyhood of warping/misalligning something. Since maps come in all shapes, sizes, and viewing angles, there can be really nuanced ways to approach how to overlay maps. What makes sense to the creator might not make sense to the viewer and it can lead to lots of different messages and spread. Also, bigger corportations have more resources to produce georeferenced maps. So, while it is relatively easy to make your own maps, the most interesting ones are made by bigger corportations, which can lead to certain narratives being pushed because the better maps will have more interaction.
That being said, I think that some research areas that this method would NOT be appropriate if a dataset is purely conceptual, fictional, or abstract and has no direct, real-world geographic coordinates to match up to. One example of this might be fictional maps that can’t be related to real locations.
