This week, for the 1%, I want you to read the blog post in the link below.
Web map design (MAIN BLOG ARTICLE)
We had considered using MangoMap in this module but others tools like OpenLayers and Geoserver link much better with JavaScript, are more widely known and offer much greater functionality. Also, unfortunately, MangoMap stopped being free! The blog post discusses some elements of good design for web maps rather than standard maps for expert users. Discuss some of the main differences between (A) standard maps for expert users and (B) web based maps for the masses.
The following link from Esri may offer some help:
Supporting story (NOT THE MAIN BLOG ARTICLE)
Both articles will offer some help when it comes to completing assignment 2 (the practical project). Please make sure you post your comments by Sunday of next week (9th April) - posts after Sunday will not receive the 1% mark.
Paul
A maps main use is for recording, storing and analyzing data and communicating this information to a user. As the blog above mentions, web sites and web developers are also focused on developing content that must capture the attention of the user or site visitor. So a map developed for a website must be attractive to the viewer, as well as being clear in its effort to inform them. While a standard digital or paper map must also be very clear in the information it is trying to deliver, it is not designed in a manner to capture the attention of a person who may not have an initial interest in it. The article from ESRI further confirms this by describing web map design methods to make a map easy to navigate with functions that are clear to the user. A web map will also only be viewed on a screen and factors such as resolution, fonts and colors that work well on the web need to be considered for the map design. These considerations are not as crucial for a standard print map as the medium for viewing the map does not change. Although the target of both types of maps is to inform the user, I believe it is clear from the above articles that web map design has far more emphasis on the attractiveness of the map as it is likely to be accessed by a far larger audience.
ReplyDeleteI agree with FearghaIUU, map is how we present the Data, it is the last step of processing Data and present them, it is supposed or should be assume that we present the information to someone who does not have idea, so present those Data visually and easy understandable is very important.The title of the blog is completely right, map design more when it is web mapping each day is more related to the web design and to the coding languages than to the good knowledge of the geography or the Data processing. Present the results attractively could give a big difference into success or not in a project. The ESRI article is speaking about the same, choose the correct color, sizes, decided what to highlight are tips that are very important to give a quick idea about what are you presenting. As the first article said you can capture the attention of a costumer in just 3-5 seconds.
ReplyDeleteThere aren't too many differences between standard maps for expert users and web maps for the masses. They all store and analyse data which Fearghal has stated. They are all created in the same way by choosing the size of map, map projection, map scale, colour used, symbols used, fonts used and the resolution to make it appealing to the user. However, web maps are a more interactive way to experiment the features on a map. You can zoom in and out of areas which will change the resolution of the map, add layers or take layers off and add symbols etc. But with standard maps they are at a stand still and you don't have the option to add layers or symbols like you can do with web maps.
ReplyDeleteAre there any differences between a standard map for experts and a web based map for the masses? The function of a map irrespective of the way in which it is delivered, or the media being used, is to get information or data across to the user in a way which is not confusing and easy to understand. The main difference for web page mapping is that there are more opportunities to make the experience more interactive. The design considerations in terms of fonts etc which both articles raise are critical for ensuring that maps can be understood and interpreted in the way that they are meant to be.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julian that the main function of any map, whether it is a standard map or web map, is to display information to the user in a way which is clear, accurate and easy to understand. As the Esri article states, it is most important that a map is always accurate and consistent and this applies to both standard maps and web maps. What makes web maps different is the need to catch a viewer's attention quickly and keep it. By making the fonts and buttons bigger, using bright colours and removing all unnecessary detail, viewers are more likely to study the web map. Esri also mentions how even by reducing the level of detail on a web map, the same volume of information can be communicated by using interactive measures such as mouse overs and pop up information boxes. So in basic terms, whilst web maps can contain as much information as a standard map, a greater emphasis is put on the design of the map.
ReplyDeleteThe object of a map is to graphically display information that is easily assimilated by the audience. Also, this is true for web maps but in addition web maps need to hold the attention of the audience. This is due to the fact that the audience has such a wealth of information and distractions on the internet, that if the map is to retain the attention of its intended audience then it needs to be designed and developed in such a way as will hold the attention of the audience. The different ways this can be achieved is through the correct use of fonts and colours as discussed in the articles. Web maps also need to a have a certain element of interactivity for the user as opposed to paper maps which suffice with no interactivity. The correct use of colours, fonts, and interactivity of web maps should be designed to appeal to the psychology of the human mind in order to achieve maximum attention span.
ReplyDeleteThese two articles enumerated the differences between a paper-map and webmap. In the recent time, webmap tend to be more popular thereby reaching the larger audience than the paper-based map. Designers of webmap must not necessarily thinks like cartographers as title of this article suggest but a good webmap must be optimized to engage visitor in the first few seconds of visit to the webpage. Esri emphasised consideration must be given to colours, fonts,text size, symbols and resolution of the computer screen to enable webmap catch the attention of the users and make them stay longer to view the webmap and possible come back to visit the webpage again. Webmap should be less distracting but rich in content to provide all the necessary data and information needed. At the end of the day, a good knowledge of geography(cartography) and web design will provide a good recipe for a great webmap. In addition to meeting the users' requirement.
ReplyDeleteA map can be referred to as a visual representation of ideas and concepts. Their main purpose is to navigate and help the user. This is true for both paper and web based maps. According to the first article, the map has evolved from from being hand drawn, to print, to digital, and now to the web. A problem with this, is that users of the web have a short attention span with high expectations, according to ESRI. Web maps now have to capture the attention of the user very quickly, in order to be effective. Maps have went away from their past 'pastel hues and finesse', to being bigger in font size, brash and very colourful, with little distractions so as to hold the attention of the user. However, although more dynamic, ESRI suggests that proper consideration needs to be given to font size, colours, text, resolution and user interactivity. Web maps, in contrast to paper maps, need to have a good level of interactivity to keep the user interested, less distracted with other things on the web, and entice them to return to the webpage.
ReplyDeletePaper maps and web maps can contain the same amount of information, but the design of the web maps need to be more emphasised.
Both paper and web maps are used to convey information to a user in a manner which is easy to interpret. For web based maps, there is the added challenge of creating maps which can maintain the users attention, or provide the information quickly enough that the user does not leave the page. To accomplish this, care should be taken to create web maps that are simplistic, using large fonts and bright colours to grab the users attention. As well as being visually attractive, web maps should include a range of interactive functions to engage the user, e.g. query functions, panning, layer selection etc.
ReplyDeleteA standard map for an expert user has no doubt been designed for a particular purpose. Its intention will be to convey certain aspects of a subject to someone who will probably know how to interpret the map they are studying, with, perhaps an expectation of effort versus reward.
ReplyDeleteWith web mapping the key issue appears to be the attention span of whoever happens to have “landed” on that particular page. By all accounts the key to web mapping is to capture the attention of the enquirer/surfer by using bold imagery to keep bounce rates to a minimum.
Due to the technology available, the web user will, and probably should, expect the map to be interactive and the data extremely current.
I agree Paul, capturing the attention of the user is important. It is also useful to note that the map shouldn't be so simplistic that it does not provide all the required information.
DeleteHaving owned an art website myself, I understand the importance of trying to grab the attention of the user to keep them on the page. Whilst many paper maps of old have likely been sought out for a particular purpose and have a higher use percentage wise, bringing maps online widens the potential user base dramatically. Again, you are likely to get a good number of people searching specifically for these maps especially within the digital age where their use is increasing as they become more commonly used within many different fields of study. However, there will be many potential users who if not immediately attracted to the map or page in general that are highly likely to ‘bounce’ back and it is for this reason, the design of the map and page in general needs to make best use of the tools and formats proven to keep these types of people interested before moving their attention to other aspects of the content. That said, there is still a need for good cartography skills to be utilized when designing such maps, I think it is more a case of taking everything into consideration to make the best use of both.
ReplyDeleteThe question of the blog, on the main difference between standard maps for expert users and web based maps for the masses is an interesting one. The answer one must suppose boils down to the perceived priority of the map maker and audience. The implication here, is that maps for experts are information heavy at the expense of appearance, while maps for the masses are flashy and engaging at the expense of substance.
ReplyDeleteFrom reading the first article this seems reinforced by the findings of bounce reduction research. Yet, this may be misleading, one could interpret the bounce tendency as, actually a function of consumer discernment. The masses demanding the information they consume be concise and clear, thus driving map composition efficiency. One may argue that "experts" while prioritising content, have undervalued functionality. While the trend of the web to democratise information and more pertinently its democratising of mapped information has lead to a reinforcement of utility and functionality as fundamental priority of maps.
In short, as Julian said it should be an aim of all map makers to prioritise both map content and map aesthetics rather than thinking of them as mutually exclusive.
One of the biggest differences between standard maps for expert users and web based maps is the amount of information that is displayed on each. But as many people have reiterated throughout this blog, the main function of both map styles is to display information. Both articles emphasise the need for greater map design for web maps in order to engage any users to view it or interact with it. Something as simple as font size can determine whether a user will be interested in the contents of the map or not. One major advantage of web maps is that it can potentially display large amounts of information but users can determine whether they wish to view such information, through the click or movement of their mouse. Once again though, whilst much emphasis is placed on the design on of web maps, it is crucial that both web maps and standard maps require clever design in order to get their intended audience to engage and interact with the information being displayed.
ReplyDeleteThere are some similarities between standard and web maps with the main purpose of each being able to display accurate information in a user-friendly manner which is appropriate for the target audience. They are also generally created in a similar fashion by ascertaining the scale, geographic extent, symbology and design.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are a vast number of differences between the two due to the web maps interactive features which are displayed in an online environment enabling a wider range of audience to be reached. It has the ability to be continuously updated with ease thus keeping it current and relevant, while standard maps are out of date as soon as they are published. Web maps have the ability to display links, play sounds, perform analyses such as queries and zoom in and out altering the scale and map layers. Making them generally more appealing and user-friendly.
As nearly everyone has said, there are similarities between standard maps for experts and web based maps, they both are a way of representing a certain type of data. However, printed maps are very hard to keep up to date, as Andrew stated, as soon as the map is printed, it is out of date. They can be good for historical purposes- but with such a huge shift online, web based maps are (seemingly) the future.
ReplyDeleteWeb based maps reach a wider audience, and can be amended with ease. The article also mentions that web based maps are often aesthetically pleasing, as most web users have a short attention span, and need to be grabbed by something fun or colourful to get their attention. Information on web based maps generally needs to be short and to the point for the same reason; which is where I feel they fall in.
With standard maps, all information is generally in one place, without the need to go searching for further information, paper based maps (as all maps are) are scaled, and that scale cannot be changed, allowing a small change or error if measuring distances occurs (although computers can automatically measure distances on web maps).
Both types of mapping can be considered similar to a small extent, but they are both extremely different. But, a map is for showing data- so can they really be THAT different?
As has been stated by several other people, web based maps and standard maps are similar in many ways; they are created for a purpose with careful consideration given to size, labels, symbols etc. Thy are both created to be easily interpreted and understood.
ReplyDeleteHowever, there are also huge differences between the two, as stated in the first article, web-based maps are intended to be very simple, bold and attention grabbing, this can be done by using bright, bold colours and large symbols. Online maps are more useful in many ways as the user can zoom in on certain areas or highlight certain things. Online maps also allow the addition (or removal) of layers showing different data (e.g. for comparison purposes). Web based maps are much more easily distributed and kept up to date. Standard maps are often bulky and, often, have to be recreated from scratch in order to update the information.
standard maps and web based maps are both created with one purpose, which is to communicate to the user. however standard maps tend to focus more on the technicalities than the aesthetics. standard maps focus more on a particular subject,thereby having only one or two figural elements. To conduct analysis with standard maps will mean sticking overlays on top of each other.
ReplyDeleteWith web based maps on the other hand, the user finds it more interactive as the user can determine what they want to see thus making it easy to use for analysis. Web based map are intended for a wider audience as you do not need a technical eye to make sense of it. They are more aesthetically pleasing with the use of unconventional colours, font types and sizes.
Both web maps and traditional maps should be designed to convey information in a clear & concise manner. Web maps now offer many features not available using traditional maps, while they may be a trade off for some of style and cartography associated with paper maps, some of the advantages may outweigh the drawbacks. As previously mentioned the ability to create interactive maps which can be updated with live information in real time.
ReplyDeleteBoth articles set some standards about maps while seeing them as products which aim to capture users, competing other similar web maps and pages.
ReplyDeleteDespite the obvious similarities between a standard map and web based ones (scale,design,data display) and differences like the ease of updating a web based map against the printed map or options like zooming etc.
we may underline the factor of time that a user spends on a web site/map is critical on the "success" of the product. In other words the sooner the user understands that what is shown is exactly what he or she is looking for , the better it is.
In that manner the web map has to be carefully designed and focused to meet specific user expectations and persuade in a different way than a standard map.
The ESRI link gives a brief guideline on the most important key points of such a design.
In general, to design an informative map either standard or web base, the audience must get a quick and clear message regarding its purpose. I agree with most of you regarding the advantages of web maps in term of the ability of product updates and personalisation. Standard maps are designed to deliver densely kind of information and adhere to cartographic standards which usually being used by specific and expert audiences. However, web-based maps are designed to answer general hypotheses questions for the public engagement as a starting point for further investigations.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are some differences between standard maps for expert users and web maps, I feel that regardless of the type of map created, they all serve the same purpose. This purpose is to portray data in a visually aesthetic manner
ReplyDeleteWhile the main aim of all maps are the same, it is obvious to see the differences between standard maps and web maps. While the emphasis may be on the visual aspect, standard maps often have a scientific aspect to them,as stated in the initial article. Much of the focus of standard maps is to display accurate results in a visual yet scientific manner, while web maps often seek to capture the attention of users rather than give detailed results and information.
While web maps may often come accross as "dumbed down", I still believe they can be a useful tool for expert users with their increased efficiency and functionality over standard maps.