My “urt” mapping design and its’ connotations:

My “urt” mapping design and its’ connotations:

fig6

 I started my design of “urt” with the basic layer of putting the media records (there is one failed attempt-empty layer : media files. It is not easy to edit the layers in urt). ThIs Media Record layer shows how each layer is designed to be related to each other. (Even though urt is doing that for you , I did not want to take it for granted for future). As you can see I did not come up with the actual names of the layer in the finished map at the map but as “person” value and “location” value. “Discourse” idea was present at the moment fort he time sake I put 4 possible discourse entry for each media. (urt should let editing layers directly but there should be some fields that could be autamatically expandable. Let’s say discourse is my expandable entry in my layer. As I filled my fourth entry and I want to make 5th one, layer urt should do it automatically.). In the media info part, while you navigate the map , you will see reflexive comments I made about the material.That person field turn into “narrator of the city” as it is not my friends themselves that I am mapping but their way of narrating the city. As for now , I am the one who is doing the mapping rather than collective mapping, I try to come up with design solutions that might take it into more participatory process. First solution I integrated is creating a blog page for each participant:

fig7

The second design solution was the integrating “discourse” tool:

fig 8

As you can see, different than “urt”s argument tool- it is a layer that could have more than one creator. I called this entry as “discourser” which could write about the discourse on the blog post and share it on the layer as well. And discourses are not separate from each other but could be related to each other and there could be an explanation how they are related in the text field. I aim participants to use the map as a tool for producing their own layers that might reveal the issues they have with their New York experiences. This “discourses” layer is also designed as a research tool for myself and others. I can navigate the material and create connections between each other. One crucial thing missing from urt at the moment is the visualization tools. Organizing data in the urt is in a good shape right now with minor issues. The real problem is the limitations on creating visual layers on the map itself. We should be able to click and add some information directly on the map. We should be able to make visual representations on the map itself (drawing, adding photos). I would like to create visual representation of each different walk on my map which should include spatiality and temporality aspects at the same time (creating wave shape with different colors and values).

Comments are closed.