[EHPweb] Prototype Mapping Interface

[Stan Silverman]

Eric,

Thanks for passing out the prototype display for comments. I know it  
has many features that are improvements over our currently "static"  
maps. I do, however, have some concerns regarding the display and  
have listed a few of them below. In addition, I'm sure you've taken  
into account the issues of relying on Google for the displays, but  
perhaps that area should be discussed as well.

Some notes on quickly viewing the prototype display:

1. The map shows up on the screen quickly but it takes at least 5  
seconds for the "earthquakes" to appear. This is on my high speed  
connection at work. Is this a function of the speed of my computer  
(javascript)?

2. The first map looks to me like something I would expect from a  
cell phone app (if I had a cell phone that could handle apps). It's  
obviously an attempt to overcome the inability to quickly or  
efficiently display data. Because of this, I prefer the current  
images which immediately give you feedback concerning the location  
and size of events.

3. On the opening map, individual events (which all seem to be  
yellow) are more obvious than clusters of many events (which seem to  
be color coded by number of events).

4. When I click on the individual events, I get a magnitude (with  
many unused decimal places), but no further indication such as time  
or link to an event page.

5. The clustered, numbered events (for 2 or more earthquakes in some  
unknown sized area) give no indication as to the size or timing of  
any included  large event. Are the colors of these clusters (red,  
blue and orange) an indication of the recency of the last earthquake  
in the cluster?

6. The Google ad along the bottom border is not only disturbing  
(including the "Terms of Use" link -- especially the restrictions on  
use section), but it also is in the way of the scale bar.

7. I'm assuming the text on the map (country names and selection,  
foreign language, fonts, and other attributes) can be better  
controlled to make things more uniform?

8. Is this one map designed to replace all of the static maps we now  
use (US, California/Nevada, and others)? If so, I think it is very  
good at allowing the zoom, pan and detailed features currently not  
available, but very poor at quickly focusing on the regions of our  
highest concern (California, Alaska, etc).

9. When I click on a numbered cluster in California, I wind up with a  
map with additional clusters, and so on and so on.  I can try zooming  
over several levels, but this is a guessing game as to when  
individual events will appear.

10. I agree with Jim L. that because list of earthquakes is not  
related to the map being displayed, things become inefficient/ 
cumbersome. It would be nice to be able to connect the list to the  
map such that clicking on a "map" link in the list would somehow  
highlight the event in the display.

Thanks again for letting me participate,

Stan Silverman


On May 25, 2010, at 9:17 AM, Eric M Martinez wrote:

> - All -
>
> Below is a link to a prototype of the new mapping interface. This  
> currently plots M0+ on a Google map and has a list view below the  
> map. Please take some time to play with this interface and send me  
> your feedback. What features do you like? What features do you  
> dislike? What features would you like to add? Was the interface  
> responsive? Easy to understand? Etc...
>
> 	http://ehpd-earthquake.cr.usgs.gov/earthquakes/rssplotting/index.php
>
> Remember, this is a prototype and for internal access only.
>
> Thanks,
> 	~Eric.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EHPweb mailing list
> EHPweb at geohazards.usgs.gov
> https://geohazards.usgs.gov/mailman/listinfo/ehpweb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://geohazards.usgs.gov/pipermail/ehpweb/attachments/20100526/0f5c0474/attachment.html>