1 / 14

Cybercartography

Cybercartography. Sunir Shah (993610990) CSC2514; November 13, 2003. Space vs. spatiality. SPACE Absolute; e.g. Aristotle, Euclid, Des Cartes, Newton Objective, empirical, analytical  Directly represent underlying data structure. SPATIALITY “Read”; socially constructed; post-modern

cleta
Download Presentation

Cybercartography

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cybercartography Sunir Shah (993610990) CSC2514; November 13, 2003

  2. Space vs. spatiality • SPACE • Absolute; e.g. Aristotle, Euclid, Des Cartes, Newton • Objective, empirical, analytical •  Directly represent underlying data structure. • SPATIALITY • “Read”; socially constructed; post-modern •  Represent or reflect user’s mental model • Designed, built, or enlivened. (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001b)

  3. Artistic maps • Metaphoric • Abstract • Non-interactive • Inaccurate • Yet reflects artist’s conceptual model • Spatiality • (Ugly? Artistic?) (December, 1994 as qtd. in Dodge & Kitchin, 2001b)

  4. Artistic navigable maps • Artistic! personal homepage • Page structure fits metaphor • Fully conceptual  spatiality • Hypertext; clickable. Shelly Jackson (1997) The body. http://www.altx.com/thebody/body.html

  5. AlphaWorld http://mapper.activeworlds.com; (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001a)

  6. Hand drawn • Kunark region • EverQuest • Accurate •  Space http://www.tapr.org/~OutridersKarana/

  7. “3D” • Physical model! • Cubes rooms; rods links • Spheres teleports •  Logical adjacency map • Logical? Of course… • Non-Euclidean data structure • …but close. (Vollaro, Sealer, & Anders, as qtd. in Dodge & Kitchin, 2001a)

  8. Automatically drawn • Automatically maps • Only what user has seen • No spidering! • No long downloads! • Change awareness. • Automatic! • Also interactive • Click to autowalk http://www.zuggsoft.com/zmud/screen.htm

  9. Text chat • Identities are text • Multiple chat rooms, where? • Overlapping conversations • Invisible (non-manifest) • Scrolls rapidly • History  context • Work around? • Ugly http://web.media.mit.edu/~fviegas/circles/new/examples.html

  10. Graphical chat • Identities are icons • No improvement on • Overlapping • Multiple chat rooms • No history; context! • No spatial relationship • Absurdist (?!) (The Palace as qtd. in Dodge & Kitcin, 2001b)

  11. Virtual reality • Embed social interaction in 3D space • Avatars  identities • Real world metaphor, really? • Again absurdist (?!!) •  Nielson: Minimalism! (OnLine! Traveler. as qtd. in Dodge & Kitcin, 2001b)

  12. Chat Circles • Clustered • “Audible range” • “Shape” of conversation • Identities visually distinct • Lurker awareness • Crowd numbers seen • No history ( extra UI) (Viegas & Donath, 1999)

  13. Design as art • Network topology • Accurately reflects source space • Very large data set! •  Artistic representation • This space is fundamentally socially constructed • Space, yet spatiality? • Objective, social maps? Hyun, Y. (2000) http://www.caida.org/tools/visualization/walrus

  14. References cited Dodge, M., and Kitchin, R. (2001) The Atlas of Cyberspace. Pearson Education: London. Dodge, M., and Kitchin, R. (2001) Mapping Cyberspace. Pearson Education: London. Viegas, F. and Donath, J. (1999) Chat Circles. Proceedings of CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburg, USA, p. 9-16; available at http://www.media.mit.edu/~fviegas/chat-circles_CHI.html

More Related