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

2. Space vs. spatiality (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001b) 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14. 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 References cited