News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Do Google Maps’s City Labels Seem So Readable? by unwind on Friday December 03, 2010 @04:29AM (#1965281)
Uh ... I'm really not a cartographer, but don't you think that you're exaggerating a bit when calling Google Maps "useless" just because if their choice of map projection?

I know I've used it, to find, research and understand the layout of, Actual Locations on Earth, more than once. I never even stopped to think about the projection.

It would be interesting to hear what you feel would be different in the end-user experience if the projection was changed.

Re:Why Do Google Maps’s City Labels Seem So Readable? by ljegou on Friday December 03, 2010 @05:09AM (#1965329)
Google Maps is not useless, far from it. The projection method chosen (Mercator) is useless for the small scales, and misleading. Except if you are a (XVII° century) marine navigator.

De-zoom and look at the apparent continent sizes, it's just horrible. Half of emerged lands in antarctica ? Groenland the size of Africa ? Think about children exposed to those maps before a good atlas is showed to them.

I co-wrote a paper about this topic, but it's in french : http://mappemonde.mgm.fr/num20/internet/int08401.html

A technical choice (summary : it's easier to have perpendicular parallels and meridians) has prevailed upon a geographical choice. It's not very complicated to link the projection to the scale of the view, all serious geographical internet portals are doing so (IGN, Ordnance Survey, etc.)

Re:Why Do Google Maps’s City Labels Seem So Readable? by ljegou on Tuesday December 07, 2010 @03:15AM (#1978422)
An example of the contamination of bad world maps projection :

http://aworldoftweets.frogdesign.com/