ABSTRACT
The desire to elevate cartography to a scientific ‘discipline’ in its own right, complete with its own theories, is in some respects a typically academic pursuit. The danger is that a crust of pseudo-scientific terms may conceal a whole set of misconceptions and simplifications. The development of any comprehensive theory needs to be based on evidence, and at present there is a distinct lack of evidence about how people actually use maps, and what problems they encounter, which is a key element in any communication process. At the same time, it must be recognized that although we cannot satisfactorily explain how good maps are made, or how some map users are able to employ them successfully, this does not mean that successful map use does not occur. Anyone who has watched a first-class orienteer navigate across unfamiliar terrain to pin-point accuracy and at a high speed does not need any further evidence that maps can be and are used successfully. It is also clear that such a performance requires a combination of a suitable map and a proficient user.
