{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016623085543518865, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0044826298094882335, 'mean_word_length': 4.789189189189189, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
'Be Map Aware: Cutting-edge…Not Close to the Edge'

No sooner had the last issue of The Cartographic Journal hit the shelves than yet another example of poor cartography was highlighted in the media. Drivers using in-car navigation systems to travel from Swaledale to Wensleydale in the Yorkshire Dales National Park, UK, were being ‘recommended’ to drive through the village of Crackpot perilously close to the edge of a 100 ft cliff. Once it became clear that the track was impassable, or they became stuck, drivers were reversing and risked plunging over the cliff edge. The media reported this in a humorous way yet for the drivers the experience must have been somewhat different. As a cartographer, my response was also different; it is fast becoming a theme in my editorials that whilst we are seeing more mapping and digital spatial data in mainstream use than ever before, quality is eroding rapidly. Yes, sometimes mapping errors are humorous but this example illustrates clearly that there are potentially serious implications. Maps have always had the potential to ‘lie’ but some lies are worse than others. It also serves to remind us of the importance of correct and effective representation of the world around us so that map users have confidence in what they are using; and confidence in the people who develop map products of whatever form. The short-cut through Crackpot may be regarded as a metaphor for modern cartography. The rapid development of technology has for too long promised to take us to exciting places but, in many ways, has constrained us to a narrow path ahead. Along the path are littered the remains of institutions that followed the path with good intent, but which fell by the wayside as interest declined and technology created a cartographic by-pass. There is, however, no short-cut to good cartographic design and the preparation of effective mapping. There is no getting away from the impact of technology but a rules-based approach cannot substitute for the application of sound cartographic principles. There is every opportunity to recapture the discipline from those who seem to be unaware of the very real impact poor mapping has; to promote good mapping and a love of maps; to reeducate and make clear the importance of maps. The British Cartographic Society is at the forefront of the Better Mapping campaign and is establishing a number of initiatives to promote good cartography recently announced by the BCS president, Seppe Cassettari. I echo Seppe’s message and encourage BCS members and Journal readers to participate; to take up the challenges set; and to contribute in whatever way you can so that we don’t end up reversing off the cliff. The Cartographic Journal has an important role to play on the road ahead. In particular, I encourage readers to submit their own work for publication in these pages to maintain and develop the journal’s standard and reputation. The Journal has a wide international readership of likeminded people and contains interesting, cutting-edge papers on a diverse range of cartography related research and opinion. What we have to do is take the message beyond these pages. You can easily help re-educate and promote by inviting a colleague or friend to read an article from The Journal. Agreed, some may find certain articles not to their taste but you simply have to flick through the last few issues and I’m certain there will be something of interest to a wider general readership. This approach will give people an insight into what it means to be involved in the mapping sciences and why cartographers are passionate about what they do. This issue of The Journal yet again provides ample proof of the breadth of cartographic research. We begin with a paper by Ted Rose et al. on the preparation of specialist maps by British military geologists in support of the 1944 D-Day landings. The wide variety of scales and map types illustrates with clarity the importance that a range of maps gives and that in these circumstances, at least, no single map has the capacity to provide a basis for good decision-making. The paper contributes to a growing literature on mapping generated during World War II and follows up Ted’s well received paper on specialist mapping of the Channel Islands prepared by German military geologists recently published in The Journal. Both papers are excellent and well researched examples of historical cartography and show that there is much to be discovered by examining maps of the past. William Mackaness and Mike Steven tackle a cartographic design issue that arises from the inevitable conflict between map scale and the detail of contour representation. In areas of steep terrain, coalescence of contour lines has traditionally been avoided through judicious manual removal of intermediate contours. As we have recognized more widely, technology can be both prohibitive as well as offering new and exciting opportunities, but this is an area where it has been difficult to create an automated approach that can apply the same standard of generalization as a human. In this paper, the author’s recognize the need to develop methods for automated identification of coalescing linework and line removal in order to make automated The Cartographic Journal Vol. 43 No. 2 pp. 115–116 July 2006 # The British Cartographic Society 2006