Cartographer's Toolkit

The contrarian that I am, I figured I’d try to formulate a good counter-argument against my oft-repeated admonitions to be creative, innovative, and novel. So this is it: I’m going to consider an argument against innovation that explains why certain cartographic conventions really are the best under certain circumstances. And I’m going to keep it short.

A great argument for this idea is in a book called Visual Thinking: for Design by Colin Ware – this is an excellent book by the way. In it, Ware says,

The theory of objects as patterns of patterns means that some objects will be easier to identify than others. . .if we want objects to be rapidly and reliably identified, they should be typical members of their class and shown from a typical viewpoint.

Some example implications for map design are as follows:

1. Maybe choosing the color blue for roads won’t be good. The viewer may confuse them for rivers, albeit fairly straight ones.
2. If you choose a projection that the audience is not used to, they may take a few extra seconds to think about the fact that the shape is different, and in those seconds you may lose credibility.
3. Using a font that nobody is used to seeing for all your labels (Bauhaus 93 is pretty cool but maybe not for street labels?) reduces letter recognition time and thereby reduces legibility.
4. As Peter Batty explains, when possible use the standard Google toolbar in your web maps since that is what the majority of users are already accustomed to and adept at.

In more general terms, use standard symbols to ensure map readability and standard content to ensure correct and rapid interpretation.