| social geography, computing, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) | |
| work as a computer technician and researcher in Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA) | |
| part-time phd in cybergeography in UCL Geography | |
| currently on secondment with Peacock Maps | |
| geography of the Net, cybergeography | |
| net measurement and mapping | |
| cataloguing of diverse range of maps | |
| critical appraisal of maps and visualisation | |
| there are many ways to describe and understand cyberspace (economics, legal, mathematics, art, …) | |
| I’m a geographer, so I believe maps enjoy a privileged position | |
| maps have been powerful visual tools for understanding the world for 1000s of years | |
| maps have been key in framing our understanding places, their size, shape and the relations between them | |
| maps have been vital for navigation |
| can be summed up by the questions: | |
| Can we make maps? - Yes | |
| Can we make useful maps? - Maybe, not yet | |
| from feedback received so far, it seems like a question many people asking | |
| need in education and training | |
| revealing what is hidden. Making the invisible visible. Enhancing our understanding | |
| no grand theories; eclectic research, drawing together disparate examples | |
| interesting in themselves. Maps as art? | |
| I take a very broad view of the term ‘map’ | |
| following from a long ‘honourable’ cartographic tradition | |
| critical appraisal about what they show, do they work, why where they made | |
| all maps distort, all deceive - some are deliberate and some are unintentional | |
| privacy issues. Maps to monitor, track & control | |
| many maps funded by military and marketing | |
| no such thing as a true map of cyberspace | |
Distortion and
Deception
“how to lie with maps”
| Most obvious being through | |
| data selection/omission | |
| projections | |
| how are maps of cyberspace | |
| deceiving? | |
| many ways to project cyberspace | |
| onto a map |
| information maps for Web navigation | ||
| wide variety of ‘experiments’ / products | ||
| visual metaphors | ||
| dimension (2D, 2.5D, 3D) | ||
| static - dynamic | ||
| levels of user interactivity | ||
| scales of maps | ||
| individual site maps | ||
| dynamic surf maps / trail maps / history viz | ||
| large chunks of information space | ||
| focus on interactive 2d space-filling information maps | ||
| the missing ‘up button’ on the browser | ||
| intelligent summarisation and generalisation | ||
| 3 key advantages: | ||
| a sense of the whole (the birds eye view / big picture) | ||
| revealing hidden connections | ||
| support interactive, unstructured browsing. | ||
"Much information seeking for haphazard"
| Much information seeking for haphazard, ill-defined. May not know exactly what you are looking for. Iterative and fluid. Exploration. | ||
| Spatialisation – turning data into maps | ||
| Key spatial properties: | ||
| area | ||
| position | ||
| proximity | ||
| Scale | ||
| + graphic properties of colour, shape, label, etc | ||
| how helpful are the current maps in navigating cyberspace? | ||
| are the maps just eye candy? | ||
| major usability issues, need evaluation | ||
| effectiveness. Misleading more than informing | ||
| killer map is yet to be drawn | ||
| I want the Tube map for the Web | ||
| potential developments | ||
| surf maps integrated into the browser | ||
| search engine result maps | ||
| developing a critical reading of information maps? | ||
"Questions ?? I would welcome..."
| Questions ?? I would welcome feedback to m.dodge@ucl.ac.uk | |
| The slides of this presentation are available at http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/martin/princeton | |
| keep in touch, join the cybergeography news bulletin http://www.cybergeography.org/register.html |