Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
2
that the term method can be used in cartography only in case of such important procedures as
cartographic generalization and cartographic projection.
However, classification terminology used by Salishchev was also insufficiently flexible to absorb
the changes brought about by the methodological and technological progress in map processing. For
instance, the term map symbol (map sign, map mark) was also used in case of conventional (non-
associative) sign. It was long before the map sign was linked with the category of designation in
philosophy (in theory of cognition above all), in logic and semiology (semiotics), which was
constituted as the general theory of signs and sign systems. Another terminological drawback was
the considerably spread use of terms denoting the kind of map (dot map, symbol map, area map,
choropleth map, isopleth map, etc.), which was empiric, non-scientific, non-theoretical compared
with differentiation of the methods used for compilation of these map. Besides, for example, the
term dot map was used for the maps, which instead of full dot (full point) also used other forms like
the empty circle, square, triangle and the like. These maps should be more correctly referred to as a
density-representing map (and the density-representing method) though no cartographer was as
brave as to do so, also because such maps were not made by cartographers in the majority of cases
but by statisticians, geographers and others, who have applied empirical approach (often incorrectly
and inadequately)
Differentiation of kinds of maps according to the methodology of the expression mean used
collided with the differentiation according to the approach to their compilation, for instance with
differentiation of analytical, complex and synthetic maps with differentiation of quantitative and
qualitative methods especially in case of method, which was a combination of qualitative and
quantitative maps, etc. A different approach to the issue of map expression was proposed in 1990 in
the framework of map language conception that is map syntactic types were identified.
3
Classification with 11 map syntactic types (fig. 1) originated according to these criteria better
express in formalized form than by words:
1. SF(Q) - type of qualitative figural signs,
2. SF(M,Dens) - type of quantitative figural signs (density type),
3. SF(M,Diagr) - type of quantitative diagrammatic sign (diagrammatic type),
4. SL(Q) - type of quantitative linear signs,
5. SL(Q-M,Curs) - type of qualitative–quantitative directional signs,
6. SL(M,Diagr) - type of quantitative linear (diagrammatic) signs,
7. SAD(Q) - type of qualitative discrete areas,
8. SAD(M,Int) - type of quantitative discrete areas – cartogram,
9. SAD(M,Diagr) - type of quantitative discrete areas with diagrams – cartodiagram,
10. SAC(M,Isogr) - type of quantitative continuous (isogradational) areas (or surfaces),
11. SF,L,AD,AC(Anam) - anamorphous type.
Designation SF(Q) or SF(M,Dens) is a formalized abbreviation of map syntactic type.
4
Fig. 1. Map syntactic types
If additional typifying criteria are chosen in the framework of each map syntactic type, subtypes,
variants and subvariants of map syntactic type can be discerned. However, all hierarchic levels
cannot be identified. In types 1-6, 10 and 11 only subtypes and variants can be identified but in the
types 7, 8, and 9 subtypes, variants and subvariants can be identified.
Fig. 2 illustrates the topographic subtype 7.1 S AD(Q,Top) of syntactic type 7 SAD(Q), which
breaks further into at least 3 variants according to the criteria:
Plen – areas filling the whole map face or interest territory,
Sep – separated areas,
Cum – cumulative areas.
5
IsohypsLux – illuminated or shaded contour lines,
Scelet – skeleton lines, skeleton of relief.
The illustrations show that classification of map syntactic types is open as it makes possible to
include more subtypes, variants and subvariants (advantage as the development continues). Such
theoretical differentiation of the ways of map expression allows for classification of more than 100
different ways (types, subtypes, variants and subvariants) of map expression which agrees with
practical situation.
Conclusion
Map syntactic types (subtypes, variants and subvariants) originated in the language conception of
map, as logically supported. It is an important piece of knowledge and its contribution is in two
areas:
– the area of map theory (meta-cartography) as the map syntactic types replace the issue of
methods of map representation, which was not acceptable both with its content and terminology,
– in the area of testing the possibilities of commercial computer programmes used as GIS tools
(first experiments for MapInfo and TopoL have been made (6) as it is known that the majority of
softwares has been developed by analysts-programmers, and not by cartographers or geographers
who need them most (the software which is able to process all types, subtypes, variants and
subvariants of map syntactic types is still missing).
Acknowledgement
6
This paper is a part of scientific project 2/1037/21 „Landscape mapping and assessment by
application of the remote sensing and geographic information system methods“, supported by the
VEGA Grant Agency
References – Bibliography