tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8123225361504762353.post519212843718094356..comments2024-03-26T21:54:22.713-07:00Comments on Cartonerd: Brewdog: Stick to the BeerKenneth Fieldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16738467752479352030noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8123225361504762353.post-15547945034871962122016-10-03T11:32:20.691-07:002016-10-03T11:32:20.691-07:00Hi Daniel, the symbols in a proportional symbol ma...Hi Daniel, the symbols in a proportional symbol map are uniform shapes that scale relative to one another so totals work fine. Percentages will also work fine and you,re right that they will account for unequal populations. Because the shapes, sizes and areal extent of the 'data containers' on a choropleth are fundamentally unequal, totals will alwyas be warped further. Normalizing to create a per capita rate....or a ratio, takes account of this. It goes a long way to ameliorating the problem of different population sizes in different sized areas. Of course - a cartogram does an even better job but let's not get into that.Kenneth Fieldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16738467752479352030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8123225361504762353.post-70759252545462976922016-10-03T11:09:53.327-07:002016-10-03T11:09:53.327-07:00Question: what is it about the proportional symbol...Question: what is it about the proportional symbol map that makes it OK to apply raw totals to maps, vs. a choropleth? I feel like I have not heard this clearly articulated (which is not to say I am arguing against it; just that I don't really have a good case for it). It seems like your description of "Texas will always come out as a lot. Montana always not" applies to the proportional symbol map just the same.pinakographoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09124609873767601446noreply@blogger.com