Ciolek, T.M. (ed.). 2001. Routes and Exchange Systems (REX): Trade, Travel and Communication - a Position Paper Version 1.0. A report from the ECAI work session following a conference "ECAI: Towards an Electronic Cultural Atlas: e-Publishing and Knowledge Management in the Humanities", 12-13 June 2001, Sydney University, Sydney, Australia.
URL: http://www.ciolek.com/PAPERS/rex-2001.html

ROUTES AND EXCHANGE SYSTEMS (REX): Trade, Travel and Communication
a Position Paper Version 1.0

A report from the ECAI work session following a conference "ECAI: Towards an Electronic Cultural Atlas: e-Publishing and Knowledge Management in the Humanities", 12-13 June 2001, Sydney University, Sydney, Australia.

Edited by: T.Matthew Ciolek
on the basis of notes prepared by Cathleen Cummings and Sydney Shep.

Document created: 30 April 2001. Last updated: 21 Jun 2001

1. Recommendations of the June 2001 REX work session

During an ECAI working session on "Routes and Exchange Systems (REX)" which took place on Thu 14 June 2001, the participating ECAI members (see the list below) agreed that:

2. Organizational Context of the REX work session

According to the ECAI Sydney 2001 Meeting organizer, Dr Ian Johnson (johnson@acl.archaeology.usyd.edu.au), the planned ECAI work sessions (open only to ECAI) members will be held Thu 14 - Sat 16 June 2001. Before and during that time Ian Johnson also suggested that "Regional/thematic-team work sessions would hopefully identify appropriate resources and develop a strategy to move towards assembling an 'atlas' or other electronic publication."

Finally, Ian Johnson has stipulated that all twelve proposed work sessions will aim to provide answers to the nine basic questions which are common to all teams meeting in Sydney:

  1. Definition of the domain: what are we trying to achieve?
  2. What are the specific problems we are trying to address?
  3. What is the current state of knowledge in this domain?
  4. What do we currently have available?
  5. What do we need to tackle the problems?
  6. How do we obtain what we need to do the job?
  7. What do we need to do to resolve the problems?
  8. Implementation schedule
  9. How do we measure progress?

These nine questions was discussed electronically by the ECAI's ROUTES AND EXCHANGE SYSTEMS (REX) core working group 30 April-30 May 2001; as well as face-to-face during the REX 3.5 hrs work meeting held 9.00-13.00 on 14 June 2001 in Sydney, Australia.

3. The discussion of the Trade Routes and Exchange Systems Work Group

Place: U. Sydney, Australia
Date: Thu 14 June 2001
Chair: Susan Whitfield
Moderator: T.Matthew Ciolek
Note takers: Cathleen Cummings (laptop), Sydney Shep (paper & pen).
 
[Editor's comment: without the generous and expert help of Cathleen Cummings and Sydney Shep, 
the REX work session would have been a meeting without a record and thus without any 
practical consequence. My deepest thanks are to the both swift, meticulous and impressive colleagues - tmc]
 
Participants:
The REX core group was comprised of (in alphabetic order; names marked by an asterix "*"
indicate participation in the email exchages only, names marked by a double asterix "**"
indicate participation in both the email and face-to-face exchanges, names without a
marker indicate participation only in the face-to-face meeting): 


Introductory remarks:

Matthew: The goal is to explore with the broadest possible definition
routes and exchange systems.

Matthew: The historical significance of the ECAI effort (the
revolutionary consequences of visualisation, geo/chrono-referencing;
interoperability and cumulative work).

Matthew: What are the possibilities for conceiving of the humanities
as a cumulative (i.e. non-palimpsest) project?

Matthew: Some basic principles: Produce data once, use it many times;
component parts, information is fragmented into elements. All the data
that is generated by these diverse projects and groups must seamlessly
mesh together. Data gathering, data integration, data utilisation are
three separate layers of operation.

Matthew: Trade routes are of interest because they are connective
devices, not simply separate spots on the map. They connect,
transcend, bridge.

Matthew: Academics as both a co-operative and a competitive
enterprise. We can harness this dynamics, this energy.

1. Definition of the domain: what are we trying to achieve? 

Matthew: Constant - the need for infrastructure for the study of trade
routes and exchange systems. Unknown - what is available, what is
needed, what sequences should work be undertaken, etc.

Matthew: Infrastructure: can mean 3 factors: 1) data; 2) logistical
support; 3) money with which one can purchase specific elements of
data and logistical support from outside sources. As scholars, we
should start with the data; if we do so, the other elements of
infrastructure will come later, by themselves.

Matthew: What is most needed for research on trade routes using the
ECAI philosophy?  We need our own data

Adrian: Data is there, raw material is plentiful. We need those who
can bring it together.

Matthew: Trade route data (graphic as well verbal maps) which are
currently in existence are incompatible with the overall ECAI model.
We need a way of normalising the disparate kinds of raw data.

John McGuire: what is ECAI? Where one can find some information what
is it about?

Michael Buckland: the starting point is not data, but rather the
questions which are relevant to scholars. Also, there are various
kinds of routes, e.g. ones in the heritage industry where
fictional/virtual circuits are created for tourists. This area
(tourism, heritage) is more likely to have funding.

Matthew: "data" is a shortcut term; you don't get the data unless you
have the questions.

Adrian: Where do we stop looking at trade routes? What is the domain?

Matthew: its useful not to put any fixed definition. Tourist routes,
pilgrimage routes, economic, military, pillaging routes (distinct from
those taken by the army) - there is an infinite realm.

Larry: the matter is really one of communication routes, the
connections between places, ideas, people, goods and services,
movement across these areas.

Matthew: exactly. But we have to all have the same approach to data
collection and data representation.

Susan: then we must make clear the definition in the position paper we
produce.

Janice: the definition is much more simple. Perhaps trade routes
should be a subset of "communication and exchange."

Larry: this looks at the openness of connections, rather than specific
places and times; it is necessary and exciting counterpoint to the
specific domains that ECAI normally looks at. So, routes of movement,
interconnections

Larry: I think about the spatial work I've done. Most of the work has
been on specific different places, setting them off and demarcating
them from other places. What is interesting about this is the
connections, the relationships, the hierarchies between places.

Janice: so actually we're talking about action, something dynamic
rather than static.

Group: Exchanges, movement of ideas, things, people, money,
information.

John Huntington: ultimately it is the movement of people.

Matthew: although you don't need people, you can use pigeons, signals,
telegraph lines, other ways of communication. The scope is the end of
glaciation to the 1820s when the physical uses were made of steam
engine, which changes the logistics of human movement. Not the
internet, not yet.

Michael: I don't think there is any need to impose a limit.

Janice: If we want to call it something other than "Trade Routes and
Exchange systems" what would we call it?

Larry: Its really about communication, whether its people that are
moving, or ideas, or goods, its about communication.

Matthew: we should be able to study the physical manifestations.

Michael: would we capture the spirit better if we though of movement
rather than interconnections. It's the flow of people goods ideas,
that might be a more fruitful point of departure. There are very
specific patterns in the way people move.

Group: patterns of movement.

Michael: exchange is a matter of movement.

Matthew: Study of the geography, history and logistics of
communication and transportation networks.

Cathleen: I thought there was a more limited definition of what we are
talking about, the word "trade" is important to me, and would make
this all easier to quantify.

Matthew: we should have a way of considering all these problems in a
similar way.

Larry: someone just mentioned the word logistics, which really
captures all of it. The logistics of movement through space. Its
geographic but it emphasise the methods and processes of movement.

Matthew: the historical dimension is important. And geography. All
these things in concert. However not sociology, how the caravan is
organised, that sort of thing. How will you in an ECAI framework
represent the social structure of a caravan? It should be left out.

John H: trade, travel and exchange is what you're talking about. I
would like to see us not get bogged down in too many semantic issues.
If we simply talk about transcending the borders, and let the scholars
participating define their own borders, that is more productive.
Trade, travel and exchange - for whatever reason - is the importance
of this.

Adrian: I you think about it as a hierarchy of problems, if you at
least use trade routes and exchange systems as a starting point, then
having begun with trade routes you can build in the other things
afterwards. Having mapped the trade routes, you can then see for
example where pilgrimage routes fit in.

Susan: but ECAI's role is not to map these routes but to provide a
framework for ECAI scholars to do these kinds of mappings.

Janice: we create guidelines and suggestions through which the
infrastructure can be challenged.

John H: we are interested in exchange, really.

Larry: the dynamic of it all is communication.

John H: but that comes under exchange, information exchange.

Matthew: can we agree now.

Colin: the idea of "routes" must be included. It is fundamental in the
idea of "connections." One thing that is tripping people up is "trade"
but it is the "route" itself that is fundamental to what we are trying
to communicate. Routes must be included.

Michael: keep the title as it is; or, trade, travel, and exchange. I
see this is all compatible and don't see any problem proceeding on
this basis. Keep the name as it is, interpret it as "trade, travel and
exchange." These follow economic paths, but economic paths may not
encompass everything or even be relevant to specific projects.

Colin: trade is behind everything but it may not be of significance to
everything we are doing to what an individual scholar is doing .

Michael: if we use "Routes and Exchange Systems," the economic aspect
can still fall under this. Trade will still be an integral part of it.

Question One so moved by the Group: "Routes and Exchange Systems:
Trade, Travel and Communication."

2. WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC PROBLEMS WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS?

John H: Effects on culture of the exchange of ideas and goods and
information. There is a need to think broadly.

Matthew: lets rephrase these ideas in spatial terms, so we can ask
spatial questions. We have to be able to map these things.

John H: the impact the effect on surrounding cities and culture, how
do we map this? How do we study the effects in spatial terms?

Susan: the most useful question is, how to map all this? How to
visualise the information?

Janice: what kind of data do we collect, what kind of information do
we need to collect, how do we store, retrieve it, map it in such a way
that we can see flows, trends, changes along a given route.

Larry: map flows is one way of doing it.

Matthew: also a question - how to integrate data, how to collect them.

John H: what we are looking at is 1) distances from centers or
locations; 2) barriers; 3) impact of local geography.

Larry: we are also interested in the friction of distance, what re the
impediments, etc.

Colin: it is like volts and amperes in the electrical current.

Colin: John was just talking about two aspects of time: the linear
time, the amount of time it takes to get from point a to point b, how
and why does this change; and, historic time - when is a route
passable and impassable and why.

Susan: what we have to do is prove a methodology by which a specific
problems are handled.

Adrian: what are the kind of units that we are using, visual, time,
distance, etc.

Janice: we don't have to be specific about what kinds of commodities
are traded, for example, but we know that commodities were traded. How
do we classify different types of commodities, how do we store this in
a database and make this visible in an interface. The specifics can be
left for the technical people.

Matthew: nodes of place, links between them, and in addition areas.

Larry: points, lines, and polygons.

Susan: so one problem we have to deal with is, how to map out changing
trade routes over time. The scholar defines the attributes he wishes
to study; time and movement are simply further attributes, entered as
data in a database and mapped.

Matthew: information systems can combine and recombine the datasets;
we need to define what we want in the datasets.

Janice: The scholarly process: Identifying the information; finding a
way to store it; a way to retrieve it; and a way to map it. The
problems are imbedded in these issues. How do we map two different
types of time: historical time; and linear time.

Colin: Matthew's system allows you to note the data without the need
for a computer. Matthew was making an effort to think about the data
without being boxed in by the technology.

Adrian: need to add categories for 'value' and 'quantity' to the
database.

John H: What we need to be asking is: What are these groups
objectives? Let ECAI be the clearinghouse for various scholars to
explore these objectives.

Making sense of our objectives:

Susan: Objective 1: so is it agreed that the objective of the
group is to map trade routes and make them visible in TimeMap.

John McGuire: Objective 2: Mapping the various types of time
(historic, linear, relative).

Sydney: Think of the objectives as threefold: theoretical, technical,
service.

John H: create a tool by which different fields, cross-currents of
data can utilise a pool of data. Need for base maps. Node A. etc, Node
B. Need for a dictionary

Larry: The problem is organisation, how are we going to create the
organisation that will make come into being all of these technical
possibilities. Problem how to make it work

************
Coffee break
************

After the break Sydney Shap puts a summary of issues on the board.

PROBLEMS:
How to map the many varieties of time
a) Conceptual		b) Technical		c) Service/Practical

OBJECTIVES: 	
1) trade route base maps (Larry Crissman)
2) database specifications and standards, including node attributes.
3) interactive data template: using Matthew's original system
4) data capture and conversion/normalisation: ii) existing datasets; ii)
non-digital (paper) data

TIMELINE:	
Funding may drive our timeline. The digitisation of trade route base
maps can be done in 6 months, if funding is available.

Matthew: asks about timeframe for each objective.

Colin: Matthew's system presented at Berkeley (in Jan 2000), we
thought it was an exhaustive system. Obviously there will be things no
one has yet thought about it, but as it is it covers all the kinds of
things we've been talking about, space, time, etc. I couldn't use it
because its too difficult to remember the notations. But if there
could be a simple template, interface, database and all the fields
could be converted into that notional language you've been talking
about it would be very easy for a scholar to enter his data in the
database fields, and then have that automatically converted into GIS
data.

Group: suggests to ask ECAI-Central about funding for Larry Crissman's
base maps.

3. What do we currently have available?

Group: We have Larry's expertise: responsible for setting up the
fields and attribute data that the fields will feed into.

Group: we have Matthew's notation/data collection system

Group: The programming expertise of ECAI Tech and ECAI Central.

4. What do we need?

Group:  Funding is needed - $10,000 US for 1,000 hours (or less) of
acquiring copyright and digitising trade route information, and
migrating them into the TimeMap system. The base maps of Eurasia are
already in existence, the task is to create and overlay the trade
routes data onto the base maps.

Group: technical and gazetteer technical input is also needed.

Janice: What we are really looking to create are base data and
scholars' tools.

Matthew: I can do nothing on this until November/December 2001. Also,
the the notation system (which is in fact a list of variables, a data
collection template about LINKS) I have created needs an extra field,
a mid date; also, the numeric code I have allocated for commodities, a
three-digit system, is not sufficient, it is not enough. I need to
widen this to a four-digit system, so it can cope properly with full
range of traded commodities.

Janice: your system is the core; if people want to amplify or modify,
they can do that.

Matthew: data collected through my notation system; the core of the
system, is a plain text ASCII approach which can be stored on a web
page, upload it in a spreadsheet, uploaded ity into a GIS browser,
send it as email, etc. etc. It is neutral. It is succinct. Each node
is defined as: "Name1,c1,name2,c2" (c = country code); then a lengthy
string of possible attributes, but they are essentially irrelevant as
they can be defined as you wish. The most important aspect is the
record ID number which has two parts: it identifies the dataset it
comes from; and identifies a record number; together with a
distinguishing bit, a or b, identifying direction of travel. Stretch
AB is not the same as BA. Travel down the Nile is not the same as
upstream of the river. The bit a/b identifies which direction of
travel from name1 to name2 is indicated. This gives you also
provenance of your information, it is always part of the record. Also,
in addition to the record ID there is a flag code which identifies
problems with the data I have gathered. This flag code is in the form
of "P000" - I have allowed 1000 problems per dataset. In the dataset,
there is annotations giving history of the dataset, and a list of the
problems identified. The definition of the problem for each specific
problem flag number is listed. Finally, each record is annotated
according to the three levels of the source's quality (A,B,C, with A
being the best), and at four levels of spatial scale (10km, 100km,
1000km, 10,000km) at which the raw data were gleaned from the source.

Matthew: We have to get relevant historical and cultural intelligence
about the communication NODES as well as the communication LINKS. I
have info on the links, but not (so far) on the nodes. We have to have
a way of classifying nodes. Migration data can also be handled. Lets
start with something simple, manageable.

Matthew: As far as the data-storage format I strongly advise sticking
to ACSII. Lets not talk about multilingual versions at this stage. If
we start talking now about Unicode we'll never finish. We can talk
about the multilingual records at a later stage.

Sydney: how do you handle maritime travel?

Matthew: you have to nominate arbitrary points in the middle of a sea,
to serve as your nodes, you have to introduce artificial points and
mark them in your database (and subsequently in your GIS browser) as
having no special significance.

Sydney: because when you enter your data, you want to put in an ideal
route, and then look at the actual route and see how it varied and
why, weather conditions etc.

Matthew: at the initial stages of your work you have to use
gazetteers, but you can't rely on any one gazetteer; I am using three
different gazetteers, for example. I am compiling my own gazetteer. A
node may have an infinite number of names - because of historical
periods, various spellings and dates, including faulty spellings; in
your names file you indicate where this name came from. Sometimes I
have a node, which I can't find any information on, can't find the
whereabouts. Then I make a hypothetical location. In the names file
the fields allow for fixed (known) locations, approximate locations,
and unknown locations; in this last case therefore I mark my record
that it is a problematic location. The exactness of the coordinates or
lack thereof can be a problem. Sometimes I'm guessing for one of my
nodes. When you do your plots for your shipping lines, the fine-grain
precision is irrelevant, you just say your node is an approximate
location. However, this has to be made manifest in your data. It is
important, though, that you keep track of where you got your
coordinates from, even if they are approximate. You need to be able to
return to your sources and check your data against them.

Sydney: I suggest that we work with the Gazetteer subgroup so that we
are asking the right questions.

Janice: that should be one of our immediate objectives, Matthew can
work with Gazetteer group, perhaps even serve as a test case for them.

Susan: so as a group we have to develop a mechanism by which we give
reports and problems to the tech group, the gazetteer group, even the
multilingual group; we should have a representative on the gazetteer
group.

Colin: so for nodes that aren't in the Getty Thesaurus, what do you
provide, the long/lat or what?

Matthew: imagine that you have two places - lets say F and G. If I
establish a location that is unknown, I give it an ID number (based on
the current date and three letter [authors initials] code), that
uniquely identify among thousands of of other unknown locations
determined by scholars all-over the world; I put that into my database
and then by looking at the map I give it an approximate coordinate and
mark the record that this location is being inferred. I give it the
best possible coordinates. Naturally, at some time in the future when
someone with GPS goes there, the location can be made more precise.

Timeline and next actions:
1. Interactive template: to be done during the ECAI work sessions next
week (w/c June 19, 2001)

2. Funding for interactive trade route base map generation: Larry
Crissman.

3. Interactive trade route base maps, entered into TimeMap. Larry
Crissman: 12 months, the first stage to be ready at the ECAI meeting
12 months from now. The first stage will be focusing on Eurasia, not
incorporating maritime routes, or other land routes.

4. The database specs and standards must be done as an ongoing
interactive process among the members of the work group.

5. Attendance at Gazetteer sessions: Matthew will go to the Sat 16
June session.

Other issues:
-- Training
-- How do you deal conceptually and technologically with various
versions of data, not privileging one over another but acknowledging
them.

What document is produced from here? 
Version 1.0 of this paper., the old version (attached below) being
version 0.0. Copy this document to Ian Johnson, Ruth Mostern, and
Jeanette Zerneke.

Next meeting: Guadalajara: December 2001; Osaka Japan, summer 2002

Discussion listserve: 
use the ECAI web site, and create a sub forum for the REX Work Group.

A RECORD OF EARLIER (EMAIL-BASED) DISCUSSIONS - version 0.0

DEFINITION OF THE DOMAIN: WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACHIEVE

REX members provided also the following observations:

WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC PROBLEMS WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS

REX members provided also the following observations:

WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE IN THIS DOMAIN
Publications

REX members provided also the following observations:

Historical Atlases

General purpose gazetteers

Trade route's gazetteers, atlases, catalogs of place-names and itineraries

Monographs and data-orientated publications

Bibliographies

Papers dealing with methodological issues

WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE IN THIS DOMAIN
Centres and Individuals with Special Expertise

REX members provided also the following observations:

Centers

Individuals with special expertise

WHAT DO WE, THE ECAI, CURRENTLY HAVE AVAILABLE

REX members provided also the following observations:

Equipment

Software

Content

Documentation

Human Resources

Grants

WHAT DO WE NEED TO TACKLE THE PROBLEMS, i.e. TO ACHIEVE THE REX OBJECTIVES

REX members provided also the following observations:

Equipment

Software

Content

Documentation

Human Resources

Grants

HOW DO WE OBTAIN WHAT WE NEED TO DO THE REX JOB

REX members provided also the following observations:

Links to Build With Other Organisations

Grant Applications

Specific Workgroups

WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEMS

Breakdown into Tasks

REX members provided also the following observations:

Methodology Development Tasks

Data Collection Tasks

  • T.Matthew Ciolek suggested (23 May 2001) that the REX group develops a series of digital online products:

    1. Nodes and Waypoints Register - 4 tasks
      1. Construct a Global Register of Geo-referenced Nodes/Waypoints [= Construct, and maintain a specialist trade-routes' focussed gazetteer of all major and minor waypoints (settlements, river crossings, mountain passes, harbours, road forks, bridges, caravan sarais, wells, oases etc. (can be done as a single project, or become an outcome of a series of independent, but cooperative projects)]
      2. Construct a Global Register of Chrono-referenced Nodes/Waypoints
      3. Construct a Global Register of Nodes of special significance (centers of economic activity; centers of religious activity; centers of political activity; centers of artistic activity; choke points, defensive points and places of re-supply).
      4. Link/Marry/Meld all three groups data

    2. Routes Register - 6 tasks
      1. Construct a Global Register of Geo-referenced movement corridors (roads, travel routes, commerce routes, pilgrimage, attack routes) (starting with points 256 kms apart, and developing it for points 32 kms, or less, apart)
      2. Construct a Global Register of Chrono-referenced Routes
      3. Construct a Global Register of Annotated Routes (annotations regarding seasonal availability of a given segment of a route, political obstacles to the use of a given route at a given moment of time, special logistical requirements, dangers)
      4. Construct a Global Table of Distances for the Distinguished Routes
      5. Construct a Global Timetable for Movement Along the Distinguished Routes
      6. Link/Marry/Meld all five groups data

    3. Uses Register - 5 tasks
      1. Construct a Global Register of data on uses of the identified routes (starting with points 256 kms apart, and developing it for points 32 kms, or less, apart)
      2. Construct a Global Register of data on goods shipped along the identified routes (starting with points 256 kms apart, and developing it for points 32 kms, or less, apart)
      3. Construct a Global Register of data on people shipped along the identified routes (starting with points 256 kms apart, and developing it for points 32 kms, or less, apart)
      4. Construct a Global Register of data on ideas shipped along the identified routes (starting with points 256 kms apart, and developing it for points 32 kms, or less, apart)
      5. Link/Marry/Meld all four groups data

      Data Publication, Data Repair and Data Integration Tasks

      • T.Matthew Ciolek suggested (23 May 2001) that the REX group publishes, continuously enhances and gradually integrates collected information about Nodes, Routes and Uses of the trade/pilgrimage routes and exchange systems. To this end REX need to agree on:

        1. Policies
          • public access vs restricted access data

        2. Data Publication Standards
          • all related data form a dataset resident on a single hypertext file
          • all datasets have a self-contained ECAI-style meta-data section
          • all datasets have "changes and updates" section
          • all datasets have "discovered problems" section
          • all data reside between <PRE> and </PRE> tags
          • all data have separate sections dealing with 'raw' (untouchable, i.e. archival) materials (both for LINES and NODES), 'primary' (based on raw, but infinitely modifiable) materials, 'georeferenced' materials (both for LINES and NODES), and (when necessary) sections for other 'derived' materials

        3. Data Tracking, Repair and Enhancement Standards
          • All information, paper and digital is, essentially, imperfect and needs to be subjected to an ongoing, iterative corrections and refinements. Hence each record of each data set needs to have a 'problem' field (to flag existence of any errors and illogicalities present in the source materials).

          • In order for the corrections and enhancements to happen efficiently, as well as happen at all, each dataset and each record within such a set needs to be uniquely identified [and located] amongst possible hundreds and thousands of similar-looking, similar-labelled bits of information). Hence
          • each record is uniquely identified using the 'xxxYYx0000_nnx' naming convention
          • all data files with data-sets are uniquely identified using the 'YYx0000.html' naming convention, where YY is a 2 digit internet country code, and x0000 is a chronological marker

        4. Data Integration Standards

          5. Four approaches are possible. It is suggested that the REX concentrates first on the Archive strategy (details below), with the long-term option to commence GIS-based harmoniously scaled modelling.
          • Archive approach: indexing, archiving and creating navigation links between the collected data sets
          • Encyclopaedia approach: indexing, structuring, semantic tagging and creating navigation and semantic links between the elements of collected data sets
          • GIS Haystack approach: Constructing a series of GIS-enabled unscaled layers of geographic and chronological information
          • GIS Model approach: Constructing a series of GIS-enabled harmoniously scaled layers of of geographic and chronological information.

      Allocation of Responsibility

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      Allocation of Resources

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      Scheduling of Tasks

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      HOW DO WE MEASURE PROGRESS

      Responsibility for Coordination

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      Milestones

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      Progress Reports and Meetings

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      Testing

      • [no input was provided at that stage (April-May 2001) by the REX members]

      THE END

      Site Meter
      visitors to www.ciolek.com since 08 May 1997.