3 replies to this topic

[gis_mayotte]

Hello everyone,
I work in a local government agency (Mayotte, Indian Ocean) as a GIS analyst. A colleague ask me to make a map locating early childhood centers.
It's intended to inform the population with some basic location information (geolocalization, street address, districts).
It's in french but I wonder if this map is not too confusing and the color I used I'm not so sure.
I used QGIS for the map design with the 'easy print' extension.
Thanks for your advises.

Attached Files

•  Les_PMI.jpeg   491.29K   58 downloads

[david17tym]

Hi gis_mayotte,
Nice clean design and layout.
Being fussy, I wouldn't necessarily include the projection statement in this context.
Scale also seems overly fussy, maybe use a scale bar instead?
Dave

[DaveB]

Looks pretty good to me. I don't mind the projection info, and I think the scale text is fine, but I do like to have rounded scales (or scales that equate well to real world measurements, such as 1:63,360). I can see very faint interior boundary lines in the blue, green and gray areas, but not in the yellow or tan/peach. I would eliminate those or make them more visible if they need to be there. Have you tried other arrangements of the various map elements and surrounds to get a nice balance without scattering everything to all corners of the map?

[Dennis McClendon]

I would eliminate both outlying tables. I'd label the regions directly on the regions, and I'd put the address (probably in italics) directly underneath the location name.

It seems odd to have no other geographic information at all. Surely there are some town names, codes postal, main roads, or even names of bays that you could add so people would know roughly where the facilities are located. As noted, you certainly don't need projection or scale, and I'd be inclined to use the cradled baby icon only once, in the title, and just use small dots or squares for the actual locations.