Have there been academic studies that compare static cartographic maps to interactive slippy maps and virtual globes, in term of the quality and quantity of information that can be communicated? I've been searching, but so far the literature seems rather sparse.
It seems to me that there is great value in the interactive nature of modern tools, particularly in the ability to quickly change perspective to see both the 'forest', the 'trees', and how they are related. And another area for which the interactive maps/globes seem to shine is in presenting temporal data. But has there been work in recent years to quantify the benefit of this interactivity? I'm mostly interested in representing attributes of objects for which the 3-D location is important (i.e. objects moving in the atmosphere), but any leads on the value of interactive maps are also appreciated. - Tyler _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
