You are here:
RICH MAPS
Citation:
White, R D. RICH MAPS. Presented at North American Cartographic Information Society meeting, Portland, OR, October 3-6, 2001.
Description:
Michael Goodchild recently gave eight reasons why traditional maps are limited as communication devices, and how interactive internet mapping can overcome these limitations. In the past, many authorities in cartography, from Jenks to Bertin, have emphasized the importance of simplicity in map design. Is the practice of cartography to become simple maps on the internet?
While not disputing technological trends and the value of simplicity, particularly in maps with simple purposes, nevertheless I want to argue for the value of the map as a container of complex information. A rich map, by this argument, contains many objects or phenomena and conveys their spatial relationships in ways that are more effective and meaningful than a set of simple maps. The argument in favor of such maps is based on several mapping traditions, on a prolegomenon to an analysis of information content in complex maps, and on an aesthetic philosophy. Two mapping traditions with rich maps are the Swiss school of topographic mapping and multivariate mapping in some atlases. An analysis of the information content of multivariate maps in national atlases reveals striking differences across these national efforts.
The aesthetic philosophy is the internal order, high informative value aesthetics of Ruth Lorand. In this philosophy, parts are related to a whole through complementary interpretation, an intuitive form of knowledge that is context sensitive and informative in varying degrees. Lorand's concepts are a way to think about art, maps, and theories. Rich maps, but not necessarily all complex maps, exhibit high aesthetic value in this way of thinking.