Portrayal and Generalisation of Point Maps for Mobile Information Services

  • Alistair Edwardes
  • Dirk Burghardt
  • Robert Weibel


One of the most frequent operations in mapping for mobile information services is the conflation and portrayal of geo-coded thematic information with a topographic base map in response to ad hoc queries on a geographic database. Usually this operation is performed by a simple overlay of the symbolised features with no consideration for maintaining the impression of spatial relationships both between the foreground features and the base map and amongst the foreground features. This chapter discusses the problems of this approach in relation to the dynamic between communicating symbolic and communicating spatial information cartographically. It describes ways in which this balance might be managed through better models of space. Further it places the problem within the broader remit of cartographic generalisation and discusses how these techniques can be combined with spatial modeling to better support mapping activities.


Spatial Relationship Spatial Relation Generalisation Operator Local Selection Graphical Conflict 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Atkinson, P.M., and Tate, N.J. (2000): Spatial scale problems and geostatistical solutions. Professional Geographer, Vol. 52 No.4, pp. 607–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barkowsky, T., and Freksa, C. (1997): Cognitive requirements on making and interpreting maps. In Spatial information theory: A theoretical basis for GIS, S. Hirtle and A. Frank, Eds. Berlin: Springer, pp. 347–361.Google Scholar
  3. Beard, K. (1991): Constraints on Rule Formation. In Map Generalization: Making Rules for Knowledge Representation, B. Buttenfield and R. McMaster, Eds. New York: Wiley, pp. 121–135.Google Scholar
  4. Berendt, B., Barkowsky, T., Freksa, C., and Kelter, S. (1998): Spatial representation with aspect maps. In Spatial cognition — An interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge. C. Freksa, C. Habel, and K. F. Wender, Eds. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Bertin, J. (1974): Graphische Semiologie: Diagramme, Netze, Karten. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  6. Board, C., and Taylor, R. M. (1977): Perception and Maps: Human factors in map design and interpretation. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
  7. Burghardt, D., and Meier, S. (1997): Cartographic Displacement using the Snakes Concept. In Semantic Modelingfor the Acquisition of Topografic Information from Images and Maps, W. Foerstner, and L. Pluemer, Eds. Basel: Birkhaeuser-Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Burghardt, D. and Cecconi, A. (2003): Mesh Simplification for Building Typification. Fifth Workshop on Progress in Automated Map Generalization., (accessed Jan 2004).Google Scholar
  9. Berg, M. de, Bose, P., Cheong, O., and Morin, P. (2004): On simplifying dot maps. Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 43–62.Google Scholar
  10. Cromley, R. G., and Campbell, G.M. (1991): Noninferior Bandwidth Line Simplification: Algorithm and Structural Analysis. Geographical Analysis, Vol. 23, pp. 25–38.Google Scholar
  11. DeLucia, A., and Black, T. (1987): A comprehensive approach to automatic feature generalization. Proceedings of the 13th International Cartographic Conference, Morelia, Mexico, pp.168–191.Google Scholar
  12. Dent, B. D. (1972): Visual Organization and Thematic Map Communication. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edwardes, A., Burghardt, D., and Weibel, R. (2003): WebPark — location based services for species search in recreation area. In Proceedings of the 21st International Cartographic Conference (ICC), Durban, South Africa., Proceedings on CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  14. Galton, A. (2000): Qualitative Spatial Change. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Habel, C. (2003): Representational Commitment in Maps. In Foundations of Geographic Information Science, M. Duckham, M. F. Goodchild, and M. F. Worboys, Eds. London, New York: Taylor & Francis, pp. 69–94.Google Scholar
  16. Hangouët, J.-F. (2000): Storing Voronoi diagrams in geographical databases. In Proceedings GeoComputation, Greenwich, UK, (accessed Jan 2004).Google Scholar
  17. Harrie, L., Sarjakoski, L., and T. and Lehto, L. (2002): A variable-scale map for smalldisplay cartography. Proceedings of the Joint International Symposium on “GeoSpatial Theory, Processing and Applications” (ISPRS/Commission IV, SDH2002), Ottawa, Canada, July 8–12, Proceedings on CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  18. Kuhn, W. (1991): Are Displays Maps or Views?. In Proceedings of ACSM-ASPRS Auto-Carto 10, Baltimore, Maryland, Published by American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Vol. 6, pp. 261–274.Google Scholar
  19. Mackaness. W. A., and Purves, R. S. (2001): Automated Displacement for Large Numbers of Discrete Map Objects. Algorithmica Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 302–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McMaster, R., and Shea, S. (1992): Generalization in digital cartography. Washington D.C: Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
  21. Meng, L. (2003): Missing theories and methods in digital cartography. Proceedings of the 21st International Cartographic Conference (ICC), Durban, South Africa., Proceedings on CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  22. Molenaar, M. (1998): An introduction to the theory of spatial object modeling for GIS. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  23. Muller, J.-C. (1979): Perception of Continuously Shaded Maps. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mustière, S. and Moulin, B. (2002): What is Spatial Context in Cartographic Generalisation?. IAPRS & SIS, Geospatial Theory, processing and Applications, Vol. 34, No. 4, Ottawa, Canada, 8–12 July, pp. 274–278Google Scholar
  25. O’Neill, R. V., and King, A.W. (1998): Homage to St.Michael: Or why are there so many books on scale?. In Ecological Scale, Theory and Applications, D.L. Peterson, and V.T. Parker, Eds. Columbia University Press, pp. 3–15.Google Scholar
  26. O’Sullivan, D., and Unwin, D. (2003): Geographic Information Analysis. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Palmer, S. E. (1978): Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In Cognition and categorization, E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd, Eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 259–303.Google Scholar
  28. Piaget, J., and Inhelder, B. (1971): The Child’s Conception of Space. London: Routledge & Kegan.Google Scholar
  29. Rappo, A., Cecconi, A., and Burghardt, D. (2004): Fischaugenprojektionen für generalisierte Kartendarstellungen auf kleinen Bildschirmen. Kirschbaum Verlag, Kartographische Nachrichten, Heft 2, (in press).Google Scholar
  30. Ratajski, L. (1967): “Phenomene des points de generalisation. In International Yearbook of Cartography, K. Kirschbaum and K. H. Meine, Eds. Bonn-Bad: Godesberg, Vol 7, pp. 143–152.Google Scholar
  31. Regnauld, N. (2001): Contextual Building Typification in Automated Map Generalization. Algorithmica, Vol. 30 No.2, pp. 312–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reichenbacher, T. (2003): Adaptive Methods for Mobile Cartography. The 21st International Cartographic Conference, Durban, Proceedings on CD-ROM.Google Scholar
  33. Ruas, A. (1998): A method for building displacement in automated map generalization. In International Journal of Geographic Information Science, Vol. 12 No. 8, pp. 789–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sloman, A. (1985): Afterthoughts on Analogical Representations. In Readings in Knowledge Representation, R. J. Brachman, and H. J. Levesque, Eds. Los Altos CA: Morgan Kaufman, pp. 431–440.Google Scholar
  35. Timpf, S. (1999): Abstraction, levels of detail, and hierarchies in map series. In Spatial Information Theory: Cognitive and computational foundations of geographic information science, Lecture Notes in Computer science, International Conference COSIT’99, C. Freksa & D. M. Mark, Eds. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 125–140.Google Scholar
  36. Töpfer, F. T., and Pillewizer, W. (1966): The principles of selection. The Cartographic Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 10–16.Google Scholar
  37. Ware, J. M., and Jones, C.B. (1998): Conflict Reduction in Map Generalisation Using Iterative Improvement. Geolnformatica, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 383–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. WebPark (2004): Geographically relevant information for mobile users in protected areas (accessed Jan 2004).Google Scholar
  39. Weibel, R. (1996): A Typology of Constraints to Line Simplification. In Advances in GIS Research II, 7th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, M. J. Kraak & M. Molenaar, Eds. London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 533–546.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alistair Edwardes
    • 1
  • Dirk Burghardt
    • 1
  • Robert Weibel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GeographyUniversity of ZurichZurich

Personalised recommendations