Date post: | 07-Aug-2015 |
Category: |
Business |
Upload: | british-cartographic-society |
View: | 212 times |
Download: | 3 times |
2009
Better Mapping
Designing for Multiple Outputs
The Obstacles and Processes
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The problem
What do we mean by multiple outputs?
• Posters
• Paper handy sized leaflets
• On screen journey planners
• Sat Nav
• GIS databases • Websites
• on mac and pc screens• on mobile technology
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The challenges
Why have things changed?
• Evolving technology = new display techniques
• iPhone, Blackberry, Windows phone, Palm Pre, etc
• New ways of collecting and communicating data
• GPS, Social networking + collaboration, Crowdsourcing
• Clients searching for cost effective solutions to reach a wide public audience
• Economic situation
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Why solve it?
Why consider designing for all?
• Convenience
• Less duplication
• Less chance for error
• Time
• Costs
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The obstacles
General obstacles
Different outputs can create the following visual constraints:
• Legible display area
• Display resolution
• Colour mode
• Viewing conditions
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The obstacles
Other obstacles…
• Previous software incompatibility
• GIS data with extensive attributes make heavy file sizes
• Bandwidth limitations/network availability
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The process
The process should include…
• Design led decisions
• Hardware/Output testing
• User testing
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The design processes
Point representation
• Symbology should be designed for the hardest to read so that all exports are legible
• Clear bold symbols are required for the web
• Symbols may be automatically replaced on each export…
• … however that does not aid in consistency
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The design processes
Area and Line representation
• Too many different styles can be difficult to interpret especially when the key is less accessible on web versions
• Pop up names can help to explain key/figural elements where required
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The design processes
Text representation
• Choice of font is important
• Pixelation can lead to illegible text
• Bold font and reversed colours work well
• Light and Italics can be troublesome
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The hardware processes
Testing
Different browsers
• Firefox [46.6%] [47.7%]
• IE [39.6%] [41%]
• 7[15.3%] [21.3%]
• 8 [12.2%] [5.2%]
• 6 [12.1%] [14.5%]
• Chrome [7.1%] [5.5%]
• Safari [3.6%] [3.0%]
• Opera [2.2%] [2.2%]
• Other [0.9%] [0.6%]
Different printers
• Laser• Inkjet• Pre-press proof• etc
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
The testing process
User Groups
Internal
• Colleagues • of different ages and experience
• Client
External
• Focus groups
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Case Study
Camberwell Local Area Map
• interactive websitehttp://www.camberwellrenewal.org.uk/camb_map
• A3 folded leaflet (10pp per side)
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Case Study
Tees Valley Metro Regeneration
• Powerpoint presentation
• A4 report
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Case Study Outcomes
Points we carried forward:
• Re-use of varied scales
• Attribution of the symbols can be carried through to the interactive version
• Knowing the output requirements at the start can save a lot of time and expense
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Summary
Strategies should be in place• These will help when creating multiple output
mapping to create effective and cost-efficient outputs
Points to consider:• Think about the most appropriate software you
should use
• Design ideology
• User !
BETTER MAPPING 2008Better Mapping 2009Clare Neal, Steer Davies Gleave
Thank you
Any questions?
Clare Neal
Senior Consultant