Cartographic Communication E-Book
142,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
This book deals with the geological record and the evolution of ideas concerning the Variscan orogenic belt in France and neighboring regions. Volume 1 is based on a general introduction concerning the imprint of the Variscan period on the geology of France, as well as on the particularities of the study of this ancient orogen. A history of the concepts applied to the Variscan belt is proposed in order to consider this orogen in the history of Earth Sciences. A paleogeodynamic analysis of the Variscan cycle sets the general framework for the evolution of the orogen, which is then tackled through the prism of the magmatic, metamorphic and tectonic record of the early phases (from Cambrian to Lower Carboniferous). Volume 2 proposes an analysis of the late evolution of the Variscan orogenic belt, reflecting its dismantling in a high-temperature context during the Upper Carboniferous and Permian. The sedimentary archives are described, as well as the questions raised by the specificities of this ancient orogen.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 380
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Foreword
Introduction
1 The Multiple Facets of the Cartographer: Communication between Rules and Attraction
1.1. Introduction
1.2. The cartographer semiologist: how to use the map
1.3. The cartographer, a craftsman drawer
1.4. The cartographer, officer of political power
1.5. The cartographer, crossing borders from geography to social sciences
1.6. The cartographer, an expert in geographic data
1.7. The art of multiplying maps to communicate better
1.8. Conclusion
1.9. References
2 Cartography as a Communication Tool: Thoughts on Models
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Are maps a simple means of communication?
2.3. Variations of the traditional model of cartographic communication
2.4. How to integrate the esthetical map function?
2.5. Which places of innovations are in the cartographic communication model?
2.6. Limitations and conclusion
2.7. References
3 Communication Challenges in Reproducible Multi-representation
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Searching and communicating with maps
3.3. Multi-representation cartography: variation on a theme
3.4. Conclusion
3.5. References
4 Mapping Flows and Movements
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Theoretical and methodological considerations of the cartographic construction of flows
4.3. The cartographic image of the flow: between continuity and technological disruptions
4.4. Challenges related to flow mapping through the example of global maritime flows
4.5. Conclusion
4.6. References
5 Cartographic Communication on the Geoweb: Between Maps and Data
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Is Geoweb a new word for a new reality?
5.3. The Geoweb era: new configurations between producers and users, amateurs and professionals
5.4. Conclusion
5.5. References
6 Rethinking Cartography on the Geoweb: Principles, Tools and Modes of Representation
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Coming back to cartography in the Geoweb
6.3. Base maps and interactivity: a look at the basic elements of Geoweb maps
6.4. Overview of the Geoweb cartographic language
6.5. The importance of technology for cartographic communication on the Geoweb
6.6. Conclusion and perspectives
6.7. References
7 Geovisualization and Cartographic Communication: Style and Interaction
7.1. Introduction
7.2. Geovisualization and cartographic communication
7.3. Geovisualization tools, between personalization and interaction
7.4. Interacting with style for more cartographic expressiveness
7.5. Diversification of representation modes and interaction for new forms of cartographic communication
7.6. Conclusion
7.7. References
Conclusion
List of Authors
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 3
Table 3.1. Population interval counts (logarithmic scale) of CIESIN grid cells...
Chapter 6
Table 6.1. Summary of the main forms of interaction between users, maps and da...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1. The objective at the center of the representation
Figure 1.2. The cartographic language.
Figure 1.3. Cartographic drawing between spatial translation and representatio...
Figure 1.4. The territorial division as a visual filter (Zanin 2016).
Figure 1.5. Visualizing a geographic concept (from Zanin 2021).
Figure 1.6. OSM, a cartographic project for free and complete geographic infor...
Figure 1.7. Geometric, graphical and semantic multiplicity (Zanin and Lambert ...
Figure 1.8. The cartographer’s place in geographical communication
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1. Cartographic information process (according to Moles 1964)
Figure 2.2. Cartographic information (according to Koláčný 1969)...
Figure 2.3. Simplified version of the model and integration of the semiology o...
Figure 2.4. Considering the intention of communication
Figure 2.5. Consideration of uses, modes and contexts in the model
Figure 2.6. Consideration of various media and uses in the model
Figure 2.7. Consideration of the involvement of different users
Figure 2.8. Consideration of the esthetic functioning of the map
Figure 2.9. Esthetic operation, downstream development
Figure 2.10. Places of innovation within a renewed model.
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1. The rhetoric of invasion according to Frontex.
Figure 3.2. The cube of cartographic rhetoric (Lambert and Ysebaert 2021).
Figure 3.3. Bunge’s radical geography (from Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.4. Spectrum of reproducibility in cartography.
Figure 3.5. Cumulative frequency of populations within the grid
Figure 3.6. Each projection has its own message (Lambert et al. 2021)
Figure 3.7. “Reality” appears differently depending on the scale (Lambert et a...
Figure 3.8. The unequal demographic power of nation-states (Lambert et al. 202...
Figure 3.9. Population densities (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.10. Demographic distortion (Lambert et al. 2021)
Figure 3.11. World population in 2020 (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.12. Demographic overflow (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.13. A world without borders (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.14. Half of the population lives in just six countries (Lambert et al...
Figure 3.15. Half of the world’s population lives on 3% of the earth’s surface...
Figure 3.16. Everything interacts with everything (Lambert et al. 2021)
Figure 3.17. Homo urbanus (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.18. Humanity in the face of rising oceans (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.19. Glocalization (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.20. Terrae incognitae (Lambert et al. 2021).
Figure 3.21. Summary of the multi-representation exercise.
Figure 3.22. There is art in cARTography (Lambert et al. 2021)
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1. Geometry and graphic semiology of the flow line.
Figure 4.2. Links-Nodes reasoning and mapping (flows, locations) (Bahoken 2020...
Figure 4.3. Matrixes and flow map types (Bahoken 2021)
Figure 4.4. Main types of flow maps (Bahoken 2021).
Figure 4.5. Variations in the representation of bilateral balances (Bahoken 20...
Figure 4.6. Geometry of transport flows and movements (Bahoken 2021)
Figure 4.7. Illustration of discrete and continuous flow/movement cartography ...
Figure 4.8. Example of flow map stylization with the Arabesque application (Ba...
Figure 4.9. The image of the flows and networks communicated in the Geoweb (Ba...
Figure 4.10. Main maritime routes for container transport.
Figure 4.11. The alignment effect of global maritime flows (Bahoken 2021).
Figure 4.12. The alignment effect of curved lines of global maritime flows (Ba...
Figure 4.13. Globalization of trade flows (curvilinear variant) (Bahoken 2021)...
Figure 4.14. Globalization of trade flows (rectilinear variant) (Bahoken 2021)...
Figure 4.15. Density of global maritime traffic (source: Shipmap.org).
Figure 4.16. Globalization of trade flows (flow logic) (Bahoken 2021).
Figure 4.17. Globalization of trade flows (link logic) (Bahoken 2021).
Figure 4.18. Structure of containerized maritime transport (Bahoken, 2021).
Figure 4.19. Globalization of trade flows of Asian origin (sinuous variant – L...
Figure 4.20. Globalization of trade flows of Asian origin (sinuous variant, lo...
Figure 4.21. Summary of the management of global flow mapping challenges (Baho...
Figure 4.22. Advantages and disadvantages of the different flow/movement maps ...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1. Koláčný’s model of cartographic communication (source: Montello (2...
Figure 5.2. Evolution of the map’s place in the interface of geographic inform...
Figure 5.3. Evolution of geographic information flow before and after the deve...
Figure 5.4. Title block and box of Michelin map No. 137 on Guadeloupe at 1/80,...
Figure 5.5. Complexity and hybridization of geographic information flow (1/2) ...
Figure 5.6. Complexity and hybridization of geographic information flow (2/2) ...
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1. OmniSci dashboard interface to explore 1.3 billion cab rides in Ne...
Figure 6.2. Examples of base map styles based on OSM data (sources: Geofabrik,...
Figure 6.3. Summary of Geoweb spatial data representation modes (according to ...
Figure 6.4. Examples of map markers (sources: Mappity, Maki-icons, Uber).
Figure 6.5. Examples of a choropleth map (leaflet) and a proportional symbols ...
Figure 6.6. Dot map of houses and buildings in the inner city of Île-de-France...
Figure 6.7. Clusters of parking meters in the city of Paris and thematic clust...
Figure 6.8. Counting the number of Airbnbs (grid) and the average price of Air...
Figure 6.9. Examples of heatmap renderings (source: Mapbox).
Figure 6.10. 3D extrusion of building heights in Paris (author: Mericskay; sou...
Figure 6.11. 3D extrusion of the population of the 200 m grid data (author: Me...
Figure 6.12. Extruded arcs representing commuter carpooling trips (author: Mer...
Figure 6.13. KeplerGL web application interface (source: Uber).
Figure 6.14. Examples of JavaScript syntax (MapboxGL) to apply color and size ...
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1. Base map styles (source: Google Maps styling tool).
Figure 7.2. Creation of StamenDesign cartographic styles (source: Stamen).
Figure 7.3. Co-visualization of maps and aerial imagery in the “Go back in tim...
Figure 7.4. Viewing historical photographs (source: Historypin).
Figure 7.5. Mobiliscope interface (source: the Mobiliscope).
Figure 7.6. GrAPHIST application interface (Gautier et al. 2017).
Figure 7.7. Continuum of topographic styles between IGN Classic Top25, Pop Art...
Figure 7.8. Variety of StamenDesign cartographic styles (source: Stamen).
Figure 7.9. Variety of topographic styles in Europe (Ory 2017).
Figure 7.10. Comparison of topographic styles: (a) Swisstopo and (b) IGN (Ory ...
Figure 7.11. Mix of Swisstopo and IGN (Ory et al. 2018).
Figure 7.12. Texture generation, ANR MapStyle project (Loi et al. 2017).
Figure 7.13. Generation of expressive styles (textures, line drawing, watercol...
Figure 7.14. Interactive exploration of styles for 3D (Brasebin et al. 2016).
Figure 7.15. Low tide (a) and high tide (b) in an abstract style, which can be...
Figure 7.16. Visualizations of rising water scenarios (source: iTowns) (create...
Figure 7.17. Co-visualization of urban temperature and morphology data (Gautie...
Guide
Cover Page
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Foreword
Introduction
Begin Reading
Conclusion
List of Authors
Index
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Pages
iii
iv
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
xv
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
229
230
231
233
234
235
236
237
238
SCIENCES
Geography and Demography, Field Director – Denise Pumain
Cartography, Subject Head – Colette Cauvin-Reymond
Cartographic Communication
Graphic Semiology, Semiotics and Geovisualization
Coordinated by
Boris Mericskay
First published 2023 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd27-37 St George’s RoadLondon SW19 4EUUK
www.iste.co.uk
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.111 River StreetHoboken, NJ 07030USA
www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2023The rights of Boris Mericskay to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2023930947
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-78945-091-0
ERC code:SH2 Institutions, Values, Environment and Space SH2_11 Human, economic and social geography SH2_12 GIS, spatial analysis; big data in political, geographical and legal studies
Foreword
Colette CAUVIN-REYMOND
LIVE, CNRS, University of Strasbourg, France
Within the framework of the ISTE SCIENCES encyclopedia and, more specifically, of the “geography and demography” field, four works are devoted to cartography. Cartography is a scientific and artistic discipline (Robinson 1952, 1953), and it is indispensable to any person, organization or institution that needs to process and represent geographic data to bring out its spatial characteristics. With current technological changes, the continuous increase in the use of Web 2.0 and the appearance of social networks, cartography is undergoing profound changes.
This discipline has, in fact, undergone many more or less fundamental changes over time, both conceptually and technically, the two being intimately linked, as de Rosnay (2008) writes: “Scientific progress and technological progress feed each other.” If its junction with statistics, as early as the end of the 19th century, had introduced new processes to translate localized phenomenon, the advent of the computer, and subsequently the birth of computerized cartography, could be considered a revolution. The latter was coined in an article by Tobler in 1959, simultaneously announcing the steps for the construction of an automated map and the basic principles of what would become geographic information systems (GIS).
Between this date and the beginning of the 1980s, this “new” cartography was developed in two directions: on the one hand, computer cartography, which reproduced what had previously been done manually, and, on the other hand, computer-assisted cartography, which opened up new avenues for creating innovative representations or introducing methods of surface analysis1. In the early 1980s, microcomputers appeared, whose immense capacities are now available to a large number of people with minimum knowledge. “Making” maps seems to be easier, updates become simpler, software, of varying quality, is multiplying. The availability of the Internet, and especially the web in 1994, further simplified the diffusion of graphic documents, which multiplied.
In addition to these new features, a fundamental change involved the communication paradigm, which is essential in the field. Despite automation, the arrival of the Internet and the web, the logic of moving from an author/producer (the one who conceives, who represents) to a reader/user, sometimes with feedback, remains predominant; the reader, the one who consults, who looks at the map and uses it, remains passive, even if, thanks to animation and especially interactivity, he/she can move his document around, zoom over it, fly over it, etc.; but he cannot modify it. However, with the arrival of Web 2.0, the semantic web, and the advent of the Geoweb from 2005 to 2010, and especially 2015, a new turning point is taking place: the reader/user, whoever they may be, becomes active. They can modify the maps on the web and can even create them. This is the beginning of a new period for cartography, which will be further developed in the works for the ISTE encyclopedia, in order to present an updated state of this science, with its transformations for the period 2010–2021.
The chosen date of 2010 as the threshold is explained by the fact that many works on cartography, both in French (Béguin and Pumain 1994; Cauvin et al. 2010, 2008, 2010) and in English (Slocum et al. 2009), were published in the previous years, exposing the characteristics of the field just before the “real” start of the semantic web, highlighting the steps necessary to produce a map, as well as the successive choices that must necessarily be made. Indeed, the construction of a map requires at least three main steps, each of which has a very specific role. The first step is to create a localized database from the geographic information provided. The second stage ensures the processing and transformation of the data in the database, insisting either on the locations or on the thematic data, or on both simultaneously, with or without taking time into account; it leads to the determination of the representation mode adopted. As for the third stage, that of communication and diffusion, it is not only based on technical solutions, on semiotic choices, on the adoption of particular actions, etc., but also on the knowledge of elements of visual perception and cognition.
These three stages2 are interrelated and are linked to both the challenges and the relationship between the recipient/user of the map. These three stages guided the selection of the four works chosen for the ISTE encyclopedia, because they start from the state of cartographic science at a period just before important changes. It will therefore be easier to highlight, describe and characterize the specific and original features of the years 2010–2021. One volume is devoted to each of the stages, and a fourth shows cartography from a historical aspect, thus facilitating a better understanding of the changes over time. Each volume can be read independently of the others and in an order that the reader wishes, according to his or her desires and expectations. The same is true for each chapter.
The aim of the historical volume is “to outline the history of cartography as it is done, and as it continues to evolve, by proposing a synopsis of the reflections and their modifications over the last forty years, in order to advance a history of cartography that takes into account current reflections and research, and above all, that opens up new avenues to explore.”
The volume on geographic information and cartography focuses on data, its characteristics and its use in cartography during a period where digital techniques are gradually, but fundamentally, recomposing contemporary societies. Data acquisition is no longer an activity reserved for specialists. The sources of geodata are diversifying, citizens are directly and often voluntarily providing geographic information (GPS readings, cell phones, connected mobile objects, Twitter, etc.); networking is immediate. The search for information for the production of maps is therefore profoundly transformed and reveals major issues in terms of digital society.
The volume on the processing and mapping of geographic information presents techniques and methods for processing both spatial and thematic information, in order to produce maps adapted to each problem. Although the book first mentions traditional procedures that are still in use, it focuses on spatial and spatiotemporal processes, as well as their apprehension through indicators and models, specifying the original cartographic representations that result from them.
The volume on communication, however, deals with the transmission of the map, because the latter is not a document that we produce so that it can remain in our pocket. It must become visible, and eventually audible and sensible, by appealing to graphic variables or others types of variables, possible actions and presenting display device properties. This volume will certainly be the easiest for detecting the specificities of the current period, with the role of choices at all stages, the interweaving of these stages and the collaborative work.
With the same tools and the same means, specialists and non-specialists will produce maps by taking what is at their disposal but with distinct training, which induces risks. Indeed, the new cartographic processes that are constantly emerging have many positive aspects: ease of use, diversity, attractiveness. However, like all new developments, their advantages have a downside; each of these processes has specific properties that are important to know, at least in order to apply them wisely and avoid mistakes. The four books presented here show that we are moving toward new logics, new ways of conceiving, translating, processing and cartographically transcribing geographic information, without necessarily having to reject what already exists. The world of maps does not escape the general evolution in which we are all participating, with our wealth and our worries. May these books help everyone to be aware of what they produce and to use all these tools with discernment.
References
Béguin, M. and Pumain, D. (1994).
La représentation des données géographiques
.
Statistique et cartographie
. Cursus, Paris.
Cauvin, C., Escobar, F., Serradj, A. (2010).
Thematic Cartography 1: Thematic Cartography and Transformations
. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Cauvin, C., Escobar, F., Serradj, A. (2010).
Thematic Cartography 2: Cartography and the Impact of the Quantitative Revolution
. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Cauvin, C., Escobar, F., Serradj, A. (2010).
Thematic Cartography 3: New Approaches in Thematic Cartography
. ISTE Ltd, London, and John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Robinson, A.H. (1952). The look of maps. An examination of cartographic design. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Robinson, A.H. (1953).
Elements of Cartography
. Wiley, New York.
Robinson, A.H., Morrison, J., Muehrcke, P.C., Kimerling, A.J., Gutpill, S.C. (1995).
Elements of Cartography
. Wiley, New York.
Rosnay, J. (2008).
2020 : les scenarios du futur. Comprendre le monde qui vient
. Fayard, Paris.
Slocum, T.A., McMaster, R.B., Kessler, F.C., Howard, H.H. (2009).
Thematic Cartography and Geography Visualization
. Prentice Hall, Hoboken.
Tobler, W.R. (1959). Automation and cartography.
The Geographical Review
, 49(4), 526–534.
Tobler, W.R. (1976). Analytical cartography.
The American Cartographer
, 3, 21–31.
Tobler, W.R. (2000). The development of analytical cartography.
Cartography and Geographic Information Science
, 27(3), 189–194.
Notes
1
This approach largely corresponds to the analytical cartography introduced by Tobler (1976, 2000).
2
A similar pattern is found in the latest version of Robinson's reference book from 1995.
Introduction
Boris MERICSKAY
ESO, University of Rennes 2, France
From the first Ptolemy maps to Google Maps, through Cassini, Mercator and Brunet maps, cartography has evolved and changed with the times, uses and technological advances. However, regardless of its medium, its form, its designer or its context of use, a map always has the same objective: to simplify reality in order to transmit information and communicate a message.
With the development of computer science, the Internet and the web, cartography has profoundly evolved as a science, an art and a discipline. At the heart of the daily practices of both individuals and organizations, maps are becoming dynamic, interactive and participatory, producers and users of maps are diversifying, and cartographic instrumentation is becoming more and more accessible to a wider audience. Their production and dissemination methods are changing, and the traditional distinction between the producer and the receiver is becoming blurred, to the extent that the stages in the design of a map are becoming confused (data, processing, formatting, dissemination, etc.).
This new sociotechnical context is not without consequences with regard to the cartographic communication process, which needs to be questioned and considered in light of the new dynamics at play. At a time when communication through maps is becoming more widespread in multiple forms, when geographic data are circulating and when the professions that use spatial representations are multiplying and diversifying, it seems necessary to establish the basis for contemporary and transversal reflection on this question. This is the perspective adopted for this volume, which proposes keys to reading and understanding the issues related to cartographic communication, semiology and geovisualization in the digital and Geoweb era.
Structured in seven chapters, the book offers an overview of the cartographic communication issue by mobilizing theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions from various fields of research (information and communication sciences, cartography, geomatics, computer science, data visualization, geovisualization, etc.). Through a series of additional approaches (semiological, semiotic, technical, esthetic, cognitive, etc.), it offers an overview of the uses and communication issues that maps have, at a time when cartography is becoming more popular.
Throughout the different chapters, the map is not considered as a simple representation of space, but as the result of a process of construction and mediation that mobilizes a whole set of concepts, methods and techniques. The questions around sign systems (semiotics), as well as graphic systems (semiology), are widely mobilized and examined. As for the methodological and technical aspects of cartographic communication, they are approached from various operational points of view (education, research, publishing, decision support, consultation) and considered through the spectrum of the different channels of production and dissemination of today’s maps (CAD, GIS, web mapping, geovisualization, statistical software, etc.) The different authors in this book are part of different currents of thought, research themes and technical and methodological practices around the representation of spatial data.
The first four chapters propose a reading of cartographic communication with regard to technological developments, uses and audiences, focusing on questions of graphic semiology, modes of representation and models of communication.
To open the volume, Chapter 1 (Christine Zanin) questions the articulations between rules and attraction in contemporary cartographic communication. It provides an overview of the foundations and issues involved in cartographic communication by reviewing different facets of the cartographer that coexist and evolve in a rapidly changing technical context.
Continuing this general reflection, Chapter 2 (Laurent Jégou) examines the traditional model of cartographic communication (sender-receiver) by modifying and developing it according to a heuristic and multidisciplinary approach. Through an iterative work of deconstruction and progressive enrichment of the model, this contribution proposes a renewed reading of cartographic communication, in light of the sociotechnical evolutions of the last few years.
More focused on the practice of thematic cartography, Chapter 3 (Nicolas Lambert, Timothée Giraud and Ronan Ysebaert) deepens cartographic communication through an exercise of cartographic multi-representation. Using the same dataset of the world population, the chapter presents and discusses a series of 13 different maps in order to illustrate how cartography is, first and foremost, a question of choice and methods.
In this line of thought, Chapter 4 (Françoise Bahoken) specifically addresses mapping flows and movements proposing a rich summary of this issue, which requires specific reflections. This contribution returns to the elements of construction of these particular types of maps, as well as the associated communication issues in light of technical developments. The chapter also presents a multi-representation cartographic work on container exchange flows, which allows for a summary of the elements discussed.
The last three chapters broaden the spectrum of reflection by focusing on cartographic communication within new digital mapping environments (Geoweb, geovisualization).
Chapter 5 (Matthieu Noucher) presents cartographic communication through new ways of making and using maps in the Geoweb era. This thought process does not put the emphasis on maps, but on spatial data, whose production and use modalities are transformed within these online environments. Notions of volunteered geographic information, producer-consumer or ego-cartography are discussed, transforming the traditional models of cartographic communication.
Chapter 6 (Boris Mericskay) also deals with the Geoweb but from the perspective of thematic cartography, focusing on the new properties of web maps and the “new” cartographic language that is taking shape on the web. This chapter proposes a summary of the principles, tools and modes of representation that are taking place on the Geoweb and broadly deals with the question of technique and tools in the cartographic communication process.
Lastly, Chapter 7 (Sidonie Christophe) completes this work by addressing the articulations between geovisualization and cartographic communication that are taking place today. This original contribution addresses the issues of style, personalization and interaction at the center of new cartographic communication issues.
This book provides an overview of the different approaches used to improve the understanding and transmission of spatial information through maps. It highlights the fundamental role of technological changes, which impose a permanent reflection on anyone using cartographic communication for the production of static maps, web maps and geovisualization applications.
1The Multiple Facets of the Cartographer: Communication between Rules and Attraction
Christine ZANIN
Géographie-cités, University of Paris-Diderot, France
1.1. Introduction
The issue of cartographic representation, as both a geographer’s tool and as an image of a territory, is a rather trivial issue that tends to appear outdated. And yet, despite the habit of “seeing” maps, the place and role of cartography in society are becoming more complex and thus need to be reexamined. Ptolemy, the oldest of the geographer-cartographers, considered a map to be an object for showing “things we cannot see”. In the modern era, the cartographer’s competence to achieve an accurate measurement of the terrain is recognized as a fundamental characteristic of scientific cartography which, in the constant improvement of this measurement, presents a path toward the “perfect” and objective representation of the world (Guilhot 2005). Today, we recognize that a map cannot be objective, that there is no single graphic answer to a geographic problem and that it is, above all, an object of communication of territorial issues.
The issues surrounding cartographic communication are complex and numerous, and the cartographer tends to get lost between what is pure communication, which is the prerogative of cartography, and all the considerations related to the plethora of tools and methods. It is no longer just a matter of seeking a more or less objective (re)transcription of reality, but more of an aid to spatial reflection, to the construction of a project, to the achievement of a spatialized objective. Besse (2010) assures us that “any map, directly or indirectly, is a matter and expression of project”, whereas Gould (1995) and Harley (1989) have always considered it as an instrument of construction or deconstruction of power. For Harley, maps impose the dominant values and beliefs of a society, what Foucault calls “an act of surveillance”. They believe that the abstract nature of maps tend to “de-socialize” the territory they represent, resulting in a rejection of their social aspect in favor of their scientific aspect.
The multiplication and technicalization of methods and tools for representing geographic data transform the map into a protean object, and make the cartographer’s task ever more complex and ambiguous. Although we continue to try and locate ourselves, to situate ourselves in space, it is not necessarily useful to resort to a so-called “scientific” cartography to be effective in the transmission of messages. Without being a specialist, or trained in its principles, anyone can easily find their position in space, as well as produce and share their own maps. Smartphones, GPS, social networks: there are many new tools, especially mobile ones, that contribute to making the places where we live, our territories, our travels and our itineraries permanently public (Tobelem Zanin 2013).
The cartographic issue is therefore no longer an issue about clearing some terra incognita, but rather about the cartographic capacity to rethink the world around us. The power inherent in cartographic knowledge makes maps, to use Jacob’s (1996) wording, “a semiological trap and an ideological weapon”, with an astonishing capacity to give an objective and natural appearance to what is a cultural and social construction. Jacob (1992) proposes a definition of cartography in which “the map is essentially considered as a symbolic mediation between man and their spatial environment, but also between individuals who can communicate thanks to this visual support” (quoted by Guilhot 2005). Regardless of the definition and the approach chosen, cartography is no longer a simple “graphic language” but a medium, a communication tool (Figure 1.1), where multiple theoretical and scientific issues are at stake (Tobelem Zanin 2013).
Between complexity and simplicity, between estheticism and semiological rigor, between rules and attraction, the objective of communication must remain at the center of the cartographer’s concerns. To this end, this chapter proposes looking further into the reflection on cartographic construction and to question it through different facets of the profession. We try to follow in the footsteps of the cartographer in order to understand how they think, construct and give meaning to their representations.
Figure 1.1.The objective at the center of the representation
The cartographer’s first objective is to “show a graphical and spatial transcription of geographical information” (Tobelem Zanin 2013). However, the cartographer being a character with multiple skills and facets, the map is neither unique nor universal. The cartographer is a geographer, but not just that. They are the result of a clever mix between a geographer, a thematician, a mathematician, a computer scientist, an analyst, a technician, a manager, a planner and a mediator, without forgetting a certain artistic touch. The image remains at the center of their cartographic concern, but a rigorous construction of the image is not what gives all its meaning to their representation. We must add the power of the art of communication: the quality of what surrounds the image is what allows it to achieve visual strength in the message conveyed. This chapter thus takes the form of a review of the various facets of the cartographer, which we consider to be assets to communicate a message. Without any hierarchical order, from the semiologist to the artist, from the craftsman to the technician, from the thematic border-crosser to the communicator, from the computer scientist to the drawer, we will see how the cartographer declines their skills to become a multi-faceted character in the art of spatial representation.
1.2. The cartographer semiologist: how to use the map
The first facet of the cartographer that we consider is that of the semiologist. Unlike a writer, who conveys their message with words, the cartographer expresses themself through the specific cartographic language, of which three elementary graphic elements (the point, the line and the area) make up the alphabet and the visual variables the vocabulary (Figure 1.2). Of course, they make good use of grammar, allowing them to organize the chosen visual variables, but they must also master its syntax, which is based on the set of rules of visual perception. The introduction of the notion of visual perception radically changes the way the map is conceived. The meaning given to the map is perceived by a direct link between the signs perceived on the map and their translation into an idea.
More simply, we could follow the trail of the semiologist who explains that a sign has a signifying side (the form of the sign) and a signified side (what the sign expresses). The whole cartographic debate lies in the adequacy or dissonance between these two sides. In France, Bertin (1967) theorized this debate by establishing graphic semiology1. In the United States, Robinson (1952) worked at the same time on map design. As Palsky (2011) points out, there is “no concrete evidence of reciprocal influence, nor any correspondence between Arthur Robinson and Jacques Bertin”, nevertheless both seek to “facilitate the passage of information and [...] reduce errors of misinterpretation. [...] They both concentrated on the elements of the map, the signs, which they considered as composing a system, a real language [...]”.
Figure 1.2.The cartographic language.
This research is completed by the works of MacEachren (1994, 1995) and Slocum (2005), in search of new semiological expressions induced by the introduction of dynamics2 in spatial representations (MacEachren 1994; Andrienko 1997; Kraak 1998; Krygier 2011), through perception analyses (Jacob 2003; Fabrikant 2015; Maggi 2015; Christophe 2016; Ory 2016). The technological (r)evolutions that have followed one another since the appearance of microcomputing have totally changed the practice, as well as the reading of maps, whatever their nature3. “New approaches”, “unavoidable” and “renewed transformations” and “new paths to explore”4 are on the agenda for contemporary cartography. Transformations in map design and display are definitely changing the ways in which maps are approached, and are greatly increasing the possible ways to represent geographic information. A reader who looks at a map tries to recognize shapes and memorize the most striking elements. “This capacity generates a focus, thus a selective attention and a concentration of consciousness, that is to say, a mental effort” (Cauvin et al. 2008).
Changing display and representation methods does not change that which is essential: a guiding thread of thought in the process of cartographic creation. However, it totally transforms the mental effort to be made. The eye and the memory act differently toward the understanding of the forms and territorial dynamics to be revealed. The semiological approach is based on rules of construction of the symbolism and is based on a codified use of the elements, but also on artistic principles. Each element of the map will always have a meaning, either because it is supporting the message, or by its mere presence, which forces the reader to interpret it, even if no particular meaning has been attributed to it. To transform a fact into a sign is not an insignificant and neutral operation. As Barthes (1985) points out, semiotics is also the science of levels: the informative level, the communicative level, the symbolic level and the signifying level. We will translate this into the different levels of reading the map, or the degree to which the user perceives the importance of the message conveyed by the map and transmitted by an adapted semiology; Bertin’s (1977) “what stands out” implies that the graphical signs on the map make immediate sense.
Lastly, it is one of the main challenges of cartographic work to strive for balance in the use of graphic signs to arbitrate between the clarity of the signs used and the relevance of the links established as well as the points of view adopted. Everything is a matter of dialogue between objectives that are often contradictory. If the map is a source of information and a source of sensation, it must above all make sense, providing a basis for understanding. There are no good or bad maps, just more or less effective maps, which may or may not achieve their assigned objective when the balance is found.
The cartographer is not just a semiologist. The construction of the graphic sign to which they are committed also makes them a craftsman, or even an artist.
1.3. The cartographer, a craftsman drawer
The second facet of the cartographer is that of the craftsman, not quite an artist, not quite a scholar. The cartographer seeks to rid themself of a label that clings to them, that of the “nice digital technology specialist” (Tobelem Zanin 2013). They want to prove that if cartography is a practice and an art, it also has its place as a science. This battle is not new. We can already find traces of it in the writings of Robinson (1952), Rimbert (1968), as well as in the latest writings of Bertin (2004), who explains that the 20th-century cartographer is often mistaken for a printer, and then for a computer scientist.
Artist, craftsman or scientist, the training of the “map maker” (the title given to the 18th-century cartographer) has long been a serious matter, a journeyman matter. In the 20th century, its history merges with the direction of the Institute of Geography by de Martonne. In their 1934 annual report, they justified the creation of the School of Cartography by the need to “train cartographers-geographers at a university that would be able to apply their expertise” to all sectors where maps were needed (government services, press, tourism). The training of high-level cartographers was thus undertaken by the university. It combined “technical skill and geographical education”, by marrying “the school of drawing and university education”.
Drawing was taught at length by Professor L. Bergelin and was based on topographic, geological, orohydrographic and geomorphological maps, wall maps and summary maps. One learns to draw the letter, to point a “picot” to a twentieth of a millimeter [...]. (Robic 1997; quoted by Bianchin 2012, p. 14)
We are here in an artistic and technical profession. The journeymen cartographers acquire their letters of nobility and are, from then on, part of a school of arts and crafts, a recognized and specific school. Technical skill and geographical culture: the cartographer is not just a “tinkerer”, but a person who is able to think about geography, to make it express structures and to show territorial organizations in images (Figure 1.3). For Bertin (2004), the cartographer is one who is “capable of constructing original maps and of guiding the work of drawers who only have manual skills”. The cartographer “must play a leading role in all public and private service mapping workshops” (de Martonne 1934).
Figure 1.3.Cartographic drawing between spatial translation and representation
The Bertin School of Cartography became a DESS in cartography and then a DESS in cartography and GIS to become the Master Carthagéo, which trains geographers-cartographers and cartographic engineers, specialized in spatial analysis and representation of geographic data. We are far from the only graphic ability. The evolution of the title of this Parisian training course expresses the major evolution of the cartographer’s work. Their skills are expanding and are moving toward a mastery of “conceptual approaches and methodological expertise of the various formalizations of geographic information”. The cartographer’s “expertise”, in line with technological developments, is doubled as a researcher. It would be necessary to verify whether they are a researcher/cartographer or a researcher/geomatician, which would then of course need to be studied in greater depth and would give rise to numerous debates, but it is nevertheless very clear that their field of action is situated, more than ever, at the intersection of numerous disciplines, the social sciences and the engineering sciences.
The cartographer is therefore no longer quite a craftsman. Yet, here is a state of being that is comfortable to them, an expertise, a technicality, a turn of hand (a graphos or rotring), almost like an artist who takes their time to elaborate their task. They are not too sure of their identity anymore. Institutionally, they are a geographer, but they will nevertheless go in search of a stronger identity. Without being a jack-of-all-trades, the cartographer becomes nomadic, moving from discipline to discipline, to put their skills as a “spatial translator” (Tobelem Zanin 2013) at the service of numerous themes in the expression of geographical projects and ideas.
1.4. The cartographer, officer of political power
The cartographer-geographer is also an officer of political power, the direct heir of an old tradition, that of the military topographer. These maps were standardized, precise and controlled by the powers that be. They had to be efficient, operational and free of extravagance, representing facts or strategies. The meaning of this idea can be found in a cartographer at the service of land use and planning.
Decision support cartography has developed considerably over time and is no longer a new field: regulatory maps and plans, land use and occupancy maps, maps of territorial aptitudes and constraints, environmental maps and maps of natural and technological risks, etc. It has been adapted to the scientific studies and research carried out almost everywhere in the world, in order to face the problems of land development, urbanization control or environmental preservation. In this context, the place of the map, and more precisely that of spatial representations, is still struggling to establish itself. While all players recognize the importance of cartography, regardless of the scale of the decision, the powerful tools developed in the panoply of geographic information systems tend to make us forget that, from the data to the map, the process must be integrated into the exchanges and discussions between all players in a territorial project (Lardon et al. 2011; Debarbieux and Lardon 2012). The map fulfills an illustrative and exploratory role for specialized research, but it also serves as a communication tool between decision-makers, practitioners and citizens.
Another problem, of purely political nature, is to sort out the purposes of the accumulated data, distinguishing between uses (assessment, control, comparison) and strategic scales (local, regional, national, etc.). In the case of territorial demands, the traditional process is either a precise question addressed to data that will be translated into a map, or an exploratory research on themes for which we try to understand the territorial organizations. Thematic, methodological and conceptual approaches come together around territorial analysis. The construction scheme can then be organized in both directions: from the analytic approach (by questions of elementary description) to a strategic approach (by questions of stakes and helping political decision), the methodological approach that makes it possible to link between the two approaches and to simultaneously reveal new analyses and new policies of spatial organization.
