<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mapping tag clouds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/mapping-tag-clouds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/mapping-tag-clouds/</link>
	<description>Adventures in maps, cartography, visualization, and Flash</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:01:14 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert Roth</title>
		<link>http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/mapping-tag-clouds/comment-page-1/#comment-656</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Roth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:36:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/?p=16#comment-656</guid>
		<description>Aw hey, I just remembered this relevant reference discussing geometric and semantic generalization of spatializations:

Fabrikant SI and A Skupin. 2005. Cognitively plausible information visualization. In: _Exploring Geovisualization_ J Dykes, AM MacEachren, MJ Kraak (eds). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier. p667-687.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aw hey, I just remembered this relevant reference discussing geometric and semantic generalization of spatializations:</p>
<p>Fabrikant SI and A Skupin. 2005. Cognitively plausible information visualization. In: _Exploring Geovisualization_ J Dykes, AM MacEachren, MJ Kraak (eds). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier. p667-687.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Roth</title>
		<link>http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/mapping-tag-clouds/comment-page-1/#comment-631</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Roth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:17:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/?p=16#comment-631</guid>
		<description>Nice ScaleMaster shout out. Generalization is a multi-disciplinary issue, and, theoretically, any generalization operator that works for the spatial component of information should have analogs for the temporal and attribute components. I think we can learn a lot about spatial generalization operators by seeing how they translate to these other two components. Your implementation is a neat first step and I&#039;d be interesting to see what kind of information graphics and interfaces we get when trying to apply other generalization operators to the tag cloud concept.

As for the distinction between aggregation and amalgamation, it depends what is considered a &quot;dimension&quot; in your attribute. I&#039;ve done some work on two-word tag clouds (a free Flex API is provided by Yahoo!), meaning that the number of words could act as the dimension. Under this definition, your 1word-to-1word mappings would not be a change in dimensionality, so it would be better described as amalgamation/merging. However, we could probably think of different ways of defining dimensionality that warrant your usage of aggregation here.

Hollerz.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice ScaleMaster shout out. Generalization is a multi-disciplinary issue, and, theoretically, any generalization operator that works for the spatial component of information should have analogs for the temporal and attribute components. I think we can learn a lot about spatial generalization operators by seeing how they translate to these other two components. Your implementation is a neat first step and I&#8217;d be interesting to see what kind of information graphics and interfaces we get when trying to apply other generalization operators to the tag cloud concept.</p>
<p>As for the distinction between aggregation and amalgamation, it depends what is considered a &#8220;dimension&#8221; in your attribute. I&#8217;ve done some work on two-word tag clouds (a free Flex API is provided by Yahoo!), meaning that the number of words could act as the dimension. Under this definition, your 1word-to-1word mappings would not be a change in dimensionality, so it would be better described as amalgamation/merging. However, we could probably think of different ways of defining dimensionality that warrant your usage of aggregation here.</p>
<p>Hollerz.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The geography of presidential campaign rhetoric &#124; Axis Maps Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/mapping-tag-clouds/comment-page-1/#comment-612</link>
		<dc:creator>The geography of presidential campaign rhetoric &#124; Axis Maps Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:16:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/?p=16#comment-612</guid>
		<description>[...] of this map was generating scale-dependent word clouds (I&#8217;ve written more about those on my personal site) and searching for individual words to display proportional symbols representing the frequency of [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of this map was generating scale-dependent word clouds (I&#8217;ve written more about those on my personal site) and searching for individual words to display proportional symbols representing the frequency of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
