I don't ordinarily criticize maps on this blog. Google is mainly concerned amongst interesting on-line maps together with maps which are experimenting amongst novel or master copy visualization techniques. This agency I tend non to concentrate on the cartographic failings of the maps featured on Google .
Yesterday's Van Gogh map postal service is a skilful illustration of this. This map is never going to win whatever awards for excellence inwards cartography precisely the Van Gogh map is an interesting experiment inwards using the novel Mapbox GL mapping platform. It could thus move real useful every bit a bear witness map for whatever developers who are starting to explore Mapbox's novel map library - so it gets no criticisms from me.
However cartographic critics produce play an invaluable utilization inwards sharing together with encouraging skilful cartographic practice. Kenneth Field's Gaza Everywhere map is a slap-up illustration of how Cartonerd's observations tin genuinely atomic number 82 to a map developer creating a ameliorate map.
I am going to brand an exception today however, inwards my 'no criticism' policy, for a map yesteryear The Daily Telegraph which has genuinely annoyed me. I'll allow Cartonerd criticize the cartography if he wants - I desire to concentrate on the map's horrible social prejudices.
The Daily Telegraph has mapped the 'best places' to alive inwards England together with Wales. To brand this map The Telegraph has created its ain 'index' based on 5 social together with economical criteria. Average Weekly Incomes together with Home Ownership levels brand upwards ii of these 5 criteria. Therefore the map places a huge weighting inwards its sentence of the 'best places' to alive on areas having no piteous people or people who don't ain their ain homes.
On offset reading close these criteria my offset idea was that The Telegraph was making a genuinely nasty sentence inwards deciding where the ameliorate places to alive are, assuming that if yous accept the selection it is ameliorate to avoid living anywhere close piteous people. I so wondered a footling close whether this sentence mightiness genuinely move true. It is alone possible that the nicer places to alive cash inwards one's chips beyond the agency of people without high incomes. The 'best places' to alive attract to a greater extent than people together with the marketplace position drives upwards the cost of belongings together with the expanse eventually becomes dominated yesteryear people amongst high incomes.
To move fair to the paper The Telegraph's supposition mightiness move non that an expanse is ameliorate because it has no piteous residents precisely that the ameliorate areas accept higher incomes because they eventually cash inwards one's chips unaffordable to anyone without a high income.
To examination this hypothesis I looked at the rankings for areas some where I alive inwards East London. In The Telegraph map Redbridge is declared a far ameliorate identify to alive than Hackney. Hackney scores real depression on the habitation ownership together with average income levels patch Redbridge scores real high on both criteria. Hackney is thus declared a less dainty identify to alive because it has likewise many piteous people.
Given the selection yet I don't scream back I'm lone inwards thinking that I would far rather alive inwards Hackney than Redbridge. Hackney is a far to a greater extent than vibrant together with exciting community than Redbridge, amongst far to a greater extent than options inwards price of restaurants, night-life together with cultural activities.
Herein lies i of the problems inwards The Telegraph's criteria for deciding where the 'best places' to alive are. My sense is that areas amongst depression income together with habitation ownership levels are oftentimes the areas which are the most exciting to live. These are the areas, inwards cities inwards particular, which oftentimes attract the young, the artistic together with the dynamic start-up companies looking for inexpensive rent.
In fact I await at The Telegraph's The Best Places inwards England together with Wales together with detect that inwards the areas I know close I would far rather alive inwards the places that The Telegraph claims are the worst places to alive than inwards their 'best places'. But I gauge that could move downwards to my ain social prejudices together with the fact that I don't necessarily despise people on depression incomes.
Buat lebih berguna, kongsi:
