How do I get to visit Aldabra? www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / How do I get to visit Aldabra? /

TWHS Maps - The data

Page  Page 23 of 23:  « Previous  1  2  3  ...  21  22  23  
Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#331 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 08:57 
elsslots:
I don't see any issues, can you name an example?

To me it looks like most the multi location sites in Europe are displaying in the Darker Grey which I take to be Single location sites.

e.g The Limes Extensions along the Danube all seem to be one dark grey colour.
The First World War sites in France and Belgium
Cesky Raj
All the Erzgebirge/Krušnohorí except Mining Landscape Měděnec – Kovářská

But to be honest most sites I've looked at seem to be like that.

The ones that look how I would expect them to are:
Welsh Slate Mining Sites
Koloniën van Weldadigheid

Author elsslots
Admin
#332 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 09:01 
meltwaterfalls:
To me it looks like most the multi location sites in Europe are displaying in the Darker Grey which I take to be Single location sites.

see my earlier reply

elsslots:
Yes that may be true. With the uploading of the most recent sets via Excel the default for all locations was Primary. Nan and I decided at some point that all locations are equal! Now it is a bit of a mix - the older TWHS have a difference between main location and sublocations (very arbitrary), while the most recent additions mostly don't have that. Which way is the best to proceed?


Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#333 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 09:08 | Edited by: meltwaterfalls 
elsslots:
see my earlier reply

Yep you beat me to it.

I think I would prefer the Multiple/ Single site definition to work on these the same way as for inscribed sites, though I realise it can sometimes be arbitrary, it is more just to aid the planning of trips.

e.g. Metz is a separate nomination to all the other First World War grave sites. At the moment you would have to click on each one individually to work it out from the Main or Country Map (or already know that Metz is a separate nomination and know where abouts in France it is)

Author Solivagant
Registered
#334 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 09:33 | Edited by: Solivagant 
meltwaterfalls:
I think I would prefer the Multiple/ Single site definition to work on these the same way as for inscribed sites,

I agree.
Paul today raised the issue under the enhancement topic about the naming of "Primary" and "Nominal" location. With inscribed sites we have of course the UNESCO determined "Location 001" -although these have their problems and are not always the most important/biggest location (some sites of course have 2 or more "equal" locations) it is useful I think to have the main site identified.

With T List we don't have the guidance of an "official" Location 001 but we should choose 1 to be the "main", "primary", "Nominal" location for a site. Where there is no obvious main location we should choose a "Central" one as "primary" to assist planning. Where a T List site is very spread out then those doing their planning will just have to make sure that they have looked for all the locations!!

Author elsslots
Admin
#335 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 09:42 | Edited by: elsslots 
meltwaterfalls:
prefer the Multiple/ Single site definition to work on these the same way as for inscribed sites,

OK, I've applied this now via a "mass change" on the database. All TWHS locations numbered 1 are now the prime location, all others the subs. In individual cases we can change that (though I would not want to change it a lot, as it is very arbitrary anyway).

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#336 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 11:17 
Great, I think that works better.

I just notice a little error on the Icelandic Turf House data, the first two seem to have been merged and show at the same place.
The location that currently displays as "Icelandic Turf House Tradition has the same coordinates as Austur-Meðalholt

It should be: Árbær,64.118652,-21.819242

Probably worth keeping that as the "nominal" location for the site as it is the one most likley to be visited as it is in suburban Reykjavik.

Author elsslots
Admin
#337 | Posted: 30 Mar 2017 11:59 
meltwaterfalls:
Icelandic Turf House data

done!

Author elsslots
Admin
#338 | Posted: 31 Mar 2017 10:07 
Need some help with mapping new Portuguese TWHS:

I've tried to find locations for the 15 (semi-)new TWHS.
I did not succeed with:
- Montado (very large area, but is there a significant point of interest?)
- Magellan Route (seems to be a vague transboundary concept)
- Alvaro Siza's works (I found 2 of them in the places named to the right on the Unesco website, no idea which the other works are)
Ideas welcome of course.

Author meltwaterfalls
Registered
#339 | Posted: 31 Mar 2017 12:19 
I'll look into that Alvaro Siza site.

Author Jakob
Registered
#340 | Posted: 1 Apr 2017 01:46 
It seems that there are multiple Locations in Porto, Lisboa, Évora, Aveiro, Oliveira de Azeméis, Marco de Canavezes, Évora, Campo Maior, Leça da Palmeira, Matosinhos, Póvoa de Varzim, Vila do Conde, Ovar, Setúbal.

I would choose at least one from each named Region. Some sites are mentioned in the tentative proposal.

Author winterkjm
Registered
#341 | Posted: 22 Apr 2017 22:12 | Edited by: winterkjm 
Can anyone make sense of this?

California Current Conservation Complex

Point Reyes/Golden Gate 10 S 516018 4206512
Monterey Bay 10 S 573957 4035398
Greater Farallones 10 S 500983 4186200
Cordell Bank 10 S 465469 4209806
Farallon Islands 10 S 499704 4172409
California Coastal 10 S 606621 4058718

I also think points for the Southern and Northern gateway entry points to the nomination should be included, as they are specifically mentioned in the description.

Point Arena (North)
Point Piedras Blancas (South)

Author Solivagant
Registered
#342 | Posted: 23 Apr 2017 02:00 | Edited by: Solivagant 
winterkjm:
Can anyone make sense of this?

These coordinates utilise the US National Grid (USNG) system.

It says something about the way the US views itself in the World that it should have provided the coordinates for its new T List sites to UNESCO in its own "National" format rather than in (Internationally understood) Latitude and Longitude! I see they have done it for ALL this year's additions (whereas earlier ones used non decimal Lat/Long). UNESCO really should have required them to alter the information as the Submission format for T List proposals clearly requires "Latitude and Longitude, or UTM coordinates:" - http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/

I have to say however that I am unable fully to understand the format of the coordinates given to UNESCO.
"10S" is undoubtedly the 100km grid reference for California from around Mendocino Forest in the North to near Santa Barbara in the South - within which all the sites are located.
BUT - the rest of the format as given to UNESCO doesn't follow what I understand to be the "correct" USNG formatting for coordinates (This can be at different degrees of accuracy by adding further digits down to 1 meter). So - if you look for instance at the coordinates for the Farallon Islands
Those given to UNESCO are "10 S 499704 4172409"
Those on the USNG map I am using (see below) are "10S DG 9970 7240"
In the UNESCO version the "DG" appears to have been replaced by a "4" in front of the E/W position and "41" in front of the N/S. In addition a further digit has been added to each to provide a more detailed single location.

If you want to "play", here is the link to the USNG system map - https://mappingsupport.com/p/gmap4.php?tilt=off&usng=14S_PG_3430_8382&z=5&t=t1
If you click on "Menu > Search" and then enter e.g "Farallon Islands" in "Search" it will zoom in and give you its reference somewhere on the page according to the device you are using.

If you want to provide this Community with the Decimal Latitude/Longitudes for the new US T List entries then the USNG map has a conversion feature. So - enter the location name to find the USNG location, Check that this coincides (with the changes in format) with the location given to UNESCO, then - "Menu > UTM-USNG- LatLng" and select the first option "Latitude longitude dd.dddddd"!!

Author elsslots
Admin
#343 | Posted: 23 Apr 2017 11:54 
Solivagant:
These coordinates utilise the US National Grid (USNG) system.

You don't have to look for the coordinates in the Lat/Lng format again, winterkjm and Solivagant.

Jakob already sent me a full set. I will update them shortly (after I am done unpacking from the Egypt trip...)

Page  Page 23 of 23:  « Previous  1  2  3  ...  21  22  23 
How do I get to visit Aldabra? www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / How do I get to visit Aldabra? / TWHS Maps - The data Top

Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message

 

 ?
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®