Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability

Although there are many articles dealing with web map applications, they often focus on just one or a few applications. Several articles deal with the technical solution of the applications, but relatively few are focused on the cartographic aspects of these applications. This article evaluates eigh...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jakub Zejdlik, Vit Vozenilek
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2024-12-01
Series:ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/14/1/9
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832588320736018432
author Jakub Zejdlik
Vit Vozenilek
author_facet Jakub Zejdlik
Vit Vozenilek
author_sort Jakub Zejdlik
collection DOAJ
description Although there are many articles dealing with web map applications, they often focus on just one or a few applications. Several articles deal with the technical solution of the applications, but relatively few are focused on the cartographic aspects of these applications. This article evaluates eight web mapping applications based on six cartographic aspects: map key, map scale, map layout, navigation elements, labels, and analytical tools. The objective is to identify differences in the presentation of geographic information and propose improvements for cartographic quality and user-friendliness. The methodology involved visual analysis at two scales. The comparison included applications such as Mapy.cz, OpenStreetMap, Google Maps, Bing Maps, HERE Maps, MapQuest, ViaMichelin, and Locus Map. The results revealed significant differences among the applications that may impact user orientation and experience. For instance, Google Maps does not display forest symbols on its default map, which can reduce clarity, whereas Mapy.cz offers the most comprehensive range of analytical tools. Advertisements in applications like MapQuest and ViaMichelin disrupt the user experience, and some applications lack essential functions, such as distance measurement. The paper identifies strengths and weaknesses in the cartographic design of these applications. Findings reveal that while each application possesses unique characteristics, they share common features. An interesting feature is the absence of cartographic symbols and labels of some elements in some applications. The study recommends the unification of cartographic principles and further user testing to optimize the layout and functionality of web mapping applications.
format Article
id doaj-art-0475596ca9204a5bb75512e24a27cfe7
institution Kabale University
issn 2220-9964
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information
spelling doaj-art-0475596ca9204a5bb75512e24a27cfe72025-01-24T13:34:58ZengMDPI AGISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information2220-99642024-12-01141910.3390/ijgi14010009Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and UsabilityJakub Zejdlik0Vit Vozenilek1Department of Geoinformatics, Palacký University Olomouc, 17 Listopadu 50, 771 46 Olomouc, Czech RepublicDepartment of Geoinformatics, Palacký University Olomouc, 17 Listopadu 50, 771 46 Olomouc, Czech RepublicAlthough there are many articles dealing with web map applications, they often focus on just one or a few applications. Several articles deal with the technical solution of the applications, but relatively few are focused on the cartographic aspects of these applications. This article evaluates eight web mapping applications based on six cartographic aspects: map key, map scale, map layout, navigation elements, labels, and analytical tools. The objective is to identify differences in the presentation of geographic information and propose improvements for cartographic quality and user-friendliness. The methodology involved visual analysis at two scales. The comparison included applications such as Mapy.cz, OpenStreetMap, Google Maps, Bing Maps, HERE Maps, MapQuest, ViaMichelin, and Locus Map. The results revealed significant differences among the applications that may impact user orientation and experience. For instance, Google Maps does not display forest symbols on its default map, which can reduce clarity, whereas Mapy.cz offers the most comprehensive range of analytical tools. Advertisements in applications like MapQuest and ViaMichelin disrupt the user experience, and some applications lack essential functions, such as distance measurement. The paper identifies strengths and weaknesses in the cartographic design of these applications. Findings reveal that while each application possesses unique characteristics, they share common features. An interesting feature is the absence of cartographic symbols and labels of some elements in some applications. The study recommends the unification of cartographic principles and further user testing to optimize the layout and functionality of web mapping applications.https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/14/1/9map applicationcartographycomparisonwebinteractive
spellingShingle Jakub Zejdlik
Vit Vozenilek
Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information
map application
cartography
comparison
web
interactive
title Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
title_full Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
title_fullStr Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
title_full_unstemmed Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
title_short Exploring Cartographic Differences in Web Map Applications: Evaluating Design, Scale, and Usability
title_sort exploring cartographic differences in web map applications evaluating design scale and usability
topic map application
cartography
comparison
web
interactive
url https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/14/1/9
work_keys_str_mv AT jakubzejdlik exploringcartographicdifferencesinwebmapapplicationsevaluatingdesignscaleandusability
AT vitvozenilek exploringcartographicdifferencesinwebmapapplicationsevaluatingdesignscaleandusability