• weariedfae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I really hope you’re obfuscating the real thing they are fighting over because it makes zero sense that anyone would fight over which is “better”. Like, what? You… You have to use both like… All the time. I’ve never had a project outside of a class assignment that didn’t require both.

    WTF

    • AnarchistArtificer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      My domain is more bioinformatics than GIS, but the way I imagined it was that if one was arguing that [thing] data is better, they’re arguing that if more people recognised the innate benefits of [thing], we wouldn’t have to rely on software that uses [other thing] so much, and that to properly utilise [thing], it would take a bit of radical reworking of workflows, but there would be significant long term net benefit.

      Basically, I think arguments like this tend to be more grounded in the socio-cultural practices of a research field than the absolute technical merits of an approach. Like in my domain, a DNA sequence is just a long sequence of 4 different letters (A, T, G & C), but there’s a bunch of ways we can encode that data into a file, many of which have trade-offs (and some of which are just an artifact of how things used to be done)