Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
dimensional phenomena, such that the complexity of the real world can be most
efficiently and effectively portrayed.
Conclusion
In addition, the multi-variate, multi-temporal and chaotic nature of geo-
graphic reality means that all the contemporary tools at the cartographer
s
disposal—including animation, imagery, multiple views, generalisation rou-
tines, display platforms, interactivity, and other technologies—will be
required to address the representation of disorder. This study has embarked
on a consideration of the cartography of disorder by examining one mappable
phenomenon, landscape terrain. It has been shown that terrain can be
characterised according to its measured disorder, but the representation of
that disorder in cartographic terms requires the development of further
techniques of representation.
'
References
Arnheim R (1972) Order and complexity in landscape design in towards a psychology of art.
University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 123-135
Clarke S (2008) Geology of NY74NE, NW and NY75NE, SW and SE, Alston, Cumbria. British
Geological Survey Open Report, OR/07/032, 51 pp
Doneus M, K¨htreiber T (2013) Airborne laser scanning and archaeological interpretation
(Chap. 3). In: Opitz R, Cowley D (eds) Interpreting archaeological topography. Oxbow
Books, Oxford, pp 32-50
Fairbairn D (2006) Measuring map complexity. Cartogr J 43:223-237
Fairbairn D (2011) Using entropy to assess the efficiency of terrain representation. In: Proceedings
of 25th international cartographic conference, Paris, Paper CO-398
Hengl T, Reuter HI (eds) (2008) Geomorphometry: concepts, software, applications. Develop-
ments in soil science, vol 33. Elsevier, 772 pp
Kovacs K, Hanke K, Lenzi K, Possenti E, Brogiolo G (2012) Utilization of airborne LiDAR
datasets in GIS environment for prospection of archaeological sites in high Alpine areas.
Archeologia e Calcolatori 23:151-164
Lewis P (1982) Axioms for reading the landscape. In: Schlereth T (ed) Material culture studies in
America. American Association for State and Local History, Nashville, pp 175-182
McGarigal K, Cushman S (2005) The gradient concept of landscape structure. In: Wiens J, Moss
M (eds) Issues and perspectives in landscape ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge, pp 112-119
Ode
, Hagerhall C, Sang N (2010) Analysing visual landscape complexity. Landscape Res
35:111-131
Pfeifer N, Roncat A, St¨ tter J, Becht M (2011) Laser scanning applications in geomorphology.
Zeitschrift f¨r Geomorphologie 55:2
Reilly S, DeGloria S, Elliot R (1999) A terrain ruggedness index that quantifies topographic
heterogeneity. InterMountain J Sci 5:23-27
Sappington M (2008) Vector ruggedness measure. Python script: http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.
asp?dbid
Å
15423
Zurlini G, Petrosillo I, Jones K, Zaccarelli N (2012) Highlighting order and disorder in social-
ecological landscapes to foster adaptive capacity and sustainability. Landscape Ecol. doi: 10.
1007/s10980-012-9763-y
¼
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search