> My "intuition" and, perhaps, that of many new GRASS users, is the file
> will be sought in the pwd if it's not important enough to mention in the
> docs.
Furthermore, one of the major issues in GIS is the question - "How did you
get this information and how accurate is it?"
So I believe that in the interests of auditable metadata and reproduction
of
derived results, raw input data such as scanned images etc should be
associated with a derived mapset.
Perhaps we need a new directory called "rawinputdata".
As a further step, whenever any program takes input from that directory, it
should write into an object specific text file, names of derived maps and a
date/timestamp. For example, you might have a scanned image "mapscan1.png",
which might have an associated metadata audit file called
"mapscan1.png.audit" containing entries like:
v.digit 20010328-13.59.02 "Mike Thomas" MIKE/CELL/contours
Cheers
Mike Thomas
----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'