17 September 2015

"Agency of Mapping"

Mikich Questions:

Because locations of countries, states, and cities are so well known today is a map still considered mapping? 

What side of mapping is more important, analogous or abstraction?

Is the map meant for the designer or for his or her audience?

Why has mapping in design and planning not been advanced or experimented with?

What are pros and cons of the new mapping techniques; drift, layering, game-boards, rhizome?

Momenee Questions:

Is one of these four mapping types presented by Corner more relevant than the others in mapping the "dynamic multiplicity" of urban processes or are they each situational?

Must each of these mapping techniques (drift, layering, game-boards, rhizome) be performed in order complete a comprehensive analysis as part of the design process? Is there a technique that is missing from this list?

Mapping is a form of abstraction. In the design process of contemporary design and planning do you feel that it is appropriate to only consider the designer(s) cognitive mapping exercises or must this act of mapping also be performed the end user's and constituent groups involved in a project? (Drift vs. Game Board?)

What is the importance of graphic representation in the success of these mapping techniques?

What role do the enhancements in technology (i.e. powerful digital and animation media) play in furthering the potential of mapping and as a tool for discovery and exploration?

No comments: