Talk:Topography/Archive 1

Topology
Topography isn't really similar at all to topology —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

In geography, the nature of topography determines topology. SCmurky 05:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite
Please discuss today's changes to article here: ... - Ballista 17:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The article on Topography prior to the changes of 19 Sep 2006 was - in my opinion - using the term "topography" merely to illustrate what were in fact aspects of geography: if you like he/she was making "topography" serve as a word for "practical geography".


 * So, for me to understand what has been long understood by "topography" I asked myself, "what is a topographer? What does an acknowledged topographer DO?"


 * In my submission, this - the work accepted as the work of a topographer - has to be what is accepted as "topography".


 * Perhaps you would like to look out 10 recognized topographers' work, and see what it is?


 * If well educated members of society accepts them as topographers, I will accept their work as topography.


 * NB. The person who talks of "the LAY of the land" is NOT an educated person. That howler was eventually put right in Wikipedia too late for Google to give Wikipedia credit. Google still quotes Wikipedia's egregious solecism.


 * Mentorsmentor


 * PS I think I will claim to be a Typo-ographer: one who cannot avoid "TYPOs". PPS. Why did someone bring up "Topology" ?
 * —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mentorsmentor (talk • contribs).


 * I'll make no comment on your opinion. However, what is unacceptable is to erase the previous article completely and substitute only your opinion. You should be able to back up your additions with citeable references - please do so. Unsupported material is subject to deletion on Wikipedia, I'm afraid. Please take the trouble to read some of Wikipedia's policies and do your best to abide by them.  (By the way, you sign comments by typing three or four tildes like this or ~ Thanks. WLD 18:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Multiple meanings/original meanings/expert rewrite needed?
I don't know why 59.176.29.102 added and  to this article or why 220.236.125.110 removed them, but to me the main problem was that parts of it assumed "topography = relief = contour lines". I have added a paragraph to this article and another to topographic map about the original use of the terms, but more needs to be done. The three articles on topography, topographic map and contour line all need to be revised, with some information moved from one article to another (for example, the rules of Vs and Os should be in contour line, and topography should have as little as possible about maps). This needs input from people with a wide range of experience who know things such as: what is on a topographic map of Holland, the history of the study of topography in France, the way that military instructors use the word topography, the approximate dates when in various countries topography started to mean just relief. Information from land surveyors and cartographers who produce these maps would help. JonH 12:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Alternate view
The Alternate view section at first struck me as a joke, but reading it, maybe it is serious. I can't really tell. In any case, it could use some major copy editing, couldn't it? I'm not even sure what it is about or what it is an alternate to. Some links other than a bio? Intriguing but more confusing than helpful... Pfly 19:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This page really needs to be merged from two competing articles into one, and it also needs references. -- Beland 13:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Boy this still needs reworking
How about "topography" as mostly a disambiguation page leading to: relief (cartography), topographic survey, topographic map (?) and topographic writing? Seems like even here we begin separating topography from the simplistic "topogaphy=relief" to the more complex "lie of the land (i.e. the full feature set of a topo map including landmarks and land cover)" and then in the details go right back to topography=relief. A lot of the article should be moved under relief. [Relief_%28disambiguation%29] suggests the cartographic meaning have its own entry. -- Natcase, 0600 UTC, 9 November 2006


 * Makes sense to me, the word "topography" goes off in so many directions, perhaps best to have the plain Topography page be a disambiguate one, if there are sufficient other pages to disambiguate to, anyway... Pfly 07:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree something needs to be done, and perhaps separate pages are the way to go. But I think it is good for readers to realize that the meanings are related and are not completely separate.  For example, if you read somewhere that "topography is critical militarily" it may refer to relief (which affects visibility) or it may refer to things like swamps and woodland (which impede movement), so you need to be aware of both variations of the meaning. JonH 14:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm thinking a disambiguation page that talks in somewhat more detail about the evolution of the term. And maybe also bring in the term "terrain" to clarify the difference between the thing itself and the depiction of it (as with hydrology and hydrography). So in brief:
 * topography as a historic term, referencing topographic writing (keep much of the existing topo writing section from current article)
 * topographic survey referred to a separate article, with brief discussion of early use of term
 * relief/terrain, referring to separate article(s) on terrain itself and its cartographic depiction
 * distinguish topology and topography
 * Am I missing something? -- Natcase, 1500 UTC, 9 November 2006


 * Perhaps I misunderstood you. I thought you meant one of those disambiguation pages that just says "Topography may refer to: Topography (relief), Topography (surface features), Topography (history), ..." which emphasizes the separateness of the topics.  But I would be happy with an article in summary style that says "see Topography (relief) for more information".  By the way, I think the "textual description" section could be made a lot shorter; parts of it duplicate the John Leland article.

Maybe its just me, but I think you people are making it far too complicated. I'm taking the Earth Science Regents this year, and we went over topography. In fact, I should be doing my lab report on it right now, but I chose to go on Wikipedia instead. =] As I was saying, I think there should be a far more simpler introduction to this. Of course I would do it myself, but I don't know anything about how wikipedia articles work and I don't want to end up destroying the article. I'll post my proposed introduction when i have the time. -- 70.107.48.173 22:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, here goes: Next: bring in Shading/hachure/DEM/contour refs to #3, edit down text part of topography, links (started in on this, hitting cartography. Natcase, 600 UTC, 16 November 2006
 * 1 new Topography refers "terrain" for the main discussion of the physical phenomenon (copied/edited from existing topography).
 * 2 new Terrain
 * 3 new Cartographic Relief Depiction for types of shading/contour/etc.


 * That's a great improvement. -- JonH 12:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Categories
I find Category:Topography and Category:Topography stubs rather puzzling. It is hard to see what meaning of topography is common to the articles that are listed. JonH 10:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Maybe we need to rename that terrain or three-dimensional geography or something. I'm out of time for now. My next project is bird's eye view, which is also sorely lacking...--Natcase 16:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I've begun reworking the topography category. Please come over and discuss at Category_talk:Topography--Natcase 07:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)