Formed in
2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue
archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of
history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and
has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
|
Geovisualization
In geovisualization three different
concepts are important. All these concept have their own ideas about the role
and importance of geovisualization. However, they also have some
commonalities. All the concepts deal with the importance of communication
and analysis. Communication as a tool to reach the people,
and analysis to support private visual thinking.
The first concept
was introduced by DiBiase. Dibiase introduced a framework for visualization
in scientific research. The role of maps
in the research sequence ranges from data exploration and hypothesis
formulation to the presentation of the final results (figure 1). In the
first stage of the
process maps are used to analyze things and create some research
questions about a particular area. For example a student who is writing his
thesis about reconstructing a natural landscape, is using a lot of maps to
formulate a hypothesis. When the student
finishes his thesis, he is using maps to show the audience the result
(for example by showing a map of the reconstructed landscape). An important
distinction is made between private visual thinking and public visual
communication. Maps used early in the process have the purpose to foster
private visual thinking, later in the process maps are used to facilitate
public visual communication of the results (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994).
 Figure 1. Dibiase describes visualization as a tool for scientific research. The curve describes the role of visualizations through the research sequence. At the beginning of the curve visualizations can play a role in visual thinking. We can think about initial data exploration and hypothesis formulation. At the end of the curve, visualizations can act as a communication tool to reach a wider audience (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994, p. 3).
A different concept of geovisualization is introduced by Taylor (1991). He was not focused on the way visualizations were used, but on the uses of visualization within cartographic research approaches during the last decades. He describes visualisation as the centre and meeting ground of formalism, communication and cognition (figure 2). Visualization is according to Taylor a subject that is focused on computer graphics that attempts to address both communication and analytical subjects of visual representation. Visualization is according to Taylor an application of computer mapping for analytical and communication purposes (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994).  Figure 2. Taylor’s view on visualization (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994, p. 4).
A response on the different views on geovisualization came from MacEachren and Kraak. Starting point in his new model was that visualization, same as communication is not just about making maps, but is also about using them. The views of DiBiase and Taylor imply that visualization is the same thing as cartography, and therefore visualization does not create something new. MacEachren and Kraak disagreed with the statements from DiBiase and Taylor and made a new model called: ‘the cartography cube’ (figure 3). The cartography cube defines visualization in terms of map use. In this case map use can be conceptualized into a three dimensional space. This space is separated into 3 different axes. The first axis represents map use from private (an individual is using the map for his own needs) to public (where someone uses a map to reach a wider audience). Second axis represent the way a map is revealing something unknown (the goal is for example to look at something interesting) verses presenting something that is already known (mapping existing spatial data for example). The last axis is showing us the human-map interaction. A high human-map interaction means the user can change the map in a substantive way. Low human-map interaction means that the user is limited in manipulating the map (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994).  Figure 3. The cartography cube (MacEachren & Taylor, 1994, p. 7). MacEachren, A. M., & Taylor, D. (Eds.). (1994). Visualization in Modern Cartography (1st Edition ). London, Great Britain: Pergamon. |