NavList:

   

Reply

Me previously:
"[Error is] normal in an obsolescent subject like traditional navigation. "

Peter, you replied:
"Frank, this seems particularly silly.  Leaving aside this assumption that obsolescence = error"

Peter, sorry. I did not mean to imply that obsolescence EQUALS error. Rather 
obsolescence leads to lower quality control. When a subject fades into 
obsolescence (a process that may take decades), it is not uncommon for errors 
to creep in and propagate simply because there is a steadily declining market 
for the information and additionally because there are fewer error-checkers 
and fewer opportunities to publish revisions and lists of errata. 

And you concluded:
"how can nav that serves an ongoing practical use be considered obsolescent?  
Its only obsolescent to you because you don't need it."

I know a couple of guys who like to use Morse code --because civilization 
might collapse, or something like that :-). While the case for celestial is 
not quite as severe as that of Morse code, there's no question that celestial 
navigation and other methods of traditional navigation are in steep decline. 
If you don't want to call it "obsolescence," feel free to use another word. 
Got any ideas?

Now, back to the "error" that Andres refers to. It turns out it has nothing to 
do with recent editions of Bowditch so my suggestion that this might be due 
to the general obsolescence of traditional navigation was wrong from the 
outset. So is it, in fact, an error? And if so, what explains its publication 
in such a reference?

-FER



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply