I’m no stranger to embarrassment. I sported a clown wig last year to poke fun at the plethora of bad map designs that exist today. Unfortunately, the audience was almost one hundred percent unmoved.*

We are all guilty of making a fool of ourselves once in a while. But I implore you, if you are going to write a book, and then ask someone (ahem) to review it on her blog, please make sure that it has been edited by a native English speaking person, if it is written in English, to start with. Second, make sure the chapters are cohesive, and in order from basic to advanced and that they cover the whole topic that is promised on the front cover. Also, be sure there aren’t a lot of major mistakes with the advice contained therein. Because if the book has all these problems, this blogger won’t review it.

*Note to self: academics are serious people.

Last week I was honored to be an expert commentator for The Guardian’s live Q&A on reinvesting in your business.

Please take a moment to read The Guardian’s roundup post, where the best of the experts responses are posted. It is worth a read for anyone who owns their own business.

The Q & A from which the roundup was created was fun to be a part of and very informative, even though it was 5am in San Francisco, where I was at the time.

If you would like to read more about reinvesting in a mapping business, specifically, check out this earlier post.

I hope everyone in the states had a happy Thanksgiving.

A recent job ad for a cartographer listed the requirements for the perfect candidate. In this bulleted list were 6 items pertaining to software development knowledge such as processes and specific technologies. One item pertained to design. Not a single item pertained to an applicant’s ability to manipulate data in meaningful ways. Unfortunately, the lack of emphasis on data and design probably stems from the fact that the firm is primarily made up of software developers. Naturally they are going to get specific about those things which they know the most about like particular IDEs, languages, and so on, and not so specific about design and data, which they know less about.

What they really need is someone who is very strong in data and design because these are obviously the areas they need the most help with. The candidate only needs to be so-so with programming, since this is already an in-house expertise. If they can get someone who is strong on all three counts then they need to throw a party, because there really aren’t that many candidates, currently, that have expert level knowledge of all three areas.

But we need to change that.

The diagram shown above explains how the software development aspect is a “new” component of the core knowledge areas that a cartographer needs to be an expert on in 2012. Students, in particular, need to realize that they will have to take classes from several different departments in order to gain enough skill in all three areas. Professionals need to make sure that they are actively improving on whichever skill they are weakest in.

Those professionals coming from the sciences, GIS, and cartography camps need to increase their software development skills: HTML 5, JavaScript, and Python to start. Take Harvard’s free, online CS50 course. Learn Python at learnpython.org. Watch Julie Powell’s ArcGIS viewer for Flex tutorials. Download some data and build a free map with TileMill and a free MapBox account and learn the basics of CSS while you’re at it.

Those coming from computer sciences need to be improving their design and data skills.* Read Nathan Yau’s popular book Visualize This. Learn the difference between choropleth maps and heat maps, how and when to normalize, scale factors, and myriad other topics in the cartography literature. Read Cartographic Perspectives.

*Hello to normalizing by population density!

There are two types of professionals that routinely make maps: GISers and graphic designers. They come from very different backgrounds and often come up with very different map solutions. But first, what do maps do?

(1) Maps are powerful to the extent that they convey useful information. The more useful the information, the more powerful they are.

(2) Maps are entertainment, to the extent that they appeal to the aesthetic sensibilities in the map reader. The better they are designed, the more entertaining they are.

GIS practitioners are traditionally focused on the level of powerful impact that their cartographic products impart. Whether or not GIS practitioners succeed in this is based on how well they also understand the entertainment needs of their map readers.

Graphic designers are traditionally focused on the level of entertainment that their maps provide. Whether or not they succeed in creating interesting maps does not always depend on their maximum employment of useful information.

Not all GIS practitioners have embraced what is really a critical part of their workflow: the aesthetic qualities of the finished map, and certainly there are graphic designers who could care less about the information behind their designs.

A cartographer, however, must be proficient in both ways of thinking, and it is what sets us apart.

One of the biggest challenges that cartographers face is clients who ask for maps containing every layer under the sun. Often, the project starts out as a map with a single focus but as it progresses the client asks for more and more layers. So “make a map of nitrogen hot spots” becomes “make a map of nitrogen hot spots with bathymetry and docks and populated places and nearshore septic systems.”

This is all well and good except for the fact that rarely are you given enough time to make this all happen without the result being a confusing mess of points, lines, and polygons. And this happens with traditional static maps as well as web maps. In fact, web maps can be even more difficult because certain engineer-types will request 20+ layers — most likely every layer your organization has ever produced — be placed on the same map.

The problem lies with (1) The symbology conflicts that inevitably arise when trying to create a distinct color or pattern for all 20 layers, many of which will have their own sub-characterizations and (2) the 20+ layer interactive map that the engineers wanted is not at all what the public wants or is able to understand, though often both engineers and the public are given the same web map interface.

To be sure, it is possible, especially with static maps, to create a map with many layers of information that looks good. However, one must realize that these are most often created by large companies with many resources, including generous timelines and many personnel. The decade-old topographic atlas of Washington State that’s on the bookshelf in my office has 71 different point, line, and area symbols listed in its legend, all of which come together in a cohesive and meaningful manner in the maps themselves. The atlas is made by DeLorme, a sizable company by all accounts. Hey, it even has a humongous rotating globe at its headquarters.

So what is a cartographer to do when faced with requirements to place a large number of layers on a map without the resources of a large company like DeLorme? Some options include:

(1) Manage expectations: let everyone know at the outset that you will do your best to incorporate as much meaningful information as possible but will reject requests for additional layers when those layers conflict with the original intent of the map.

(2) Create multiple maps: adopt a small-multiples style of mapping so that everyone’s favorite layer gets shown, just not all at the same time. This is possible in web maps by creating a “metro tiles” type of interface linking to the separate maps. Even just creating two maps, one for the public with only the most salient layers and one for the engineers with everything but the kitchen sink, could alleviate some of the design pain.

(3) Employ a detailed, yet mostly mono-chromatic pre-rendered basemap to provide all the appropriate contextual information. These pre-rendered basemaps (from Esri, Stamen, Google, etc.) look good, are ready to go, and contain a multitude of layered information.

If you are an embrace-the-challenge type of cartographer, and are amenable to trying to incorporate all requested layers into a single, effective, design, then at the very least make it known that you will need a commensurate amount of time, or even additional personnel, to complete the project.