Ms. Chikako Kurokawa has been working as a GIS consultant since 2000 in Kokusai Kogyo, a GIS consulting company in Japan. Her specialty is spatial data designing and she has been engaged in spatial data standardization projects in Japan. Now she is interested in personalized representation with standardized spatial data.
Mr. Morishige Ota started to work as GIS consultant in 1974 in a GIS consulting company named Kokusai Kogyo in Japan and now he is the fellow of this company. He has been a project member for Temporal Schema, Spatial Schema, Schema for Moving Features, GML and others in ISO/TC211 since 1995. And he was a guest professor of the Center for Spatial Information Sciences in University of Tokyo since the beginning of 2005 until the end of 2006.

PORTRAYAL SCHEMA DESIGN AND MECHANISM 
FOR THE MAP PERSONALIZATION
KUROKAWA, Chikako
Kokusai Kogyo Co., Ltd.
chikako_kurokawa@kkc.co.jp
OTA, Morishige
Kokusai Kogyo co., Ltd.
morishige_ota@kkc.co.jp
Abstract	We often use maps for personal uses such as in Blogs. However there are not so many maps which really get to us, because of the lack of flexible map design systems for individuals. In this paper, we propose the map design system which provides personalized maps automatically to users by selecting personal preferences. This system creates personalized maps with portrayal data arranged for each user with suitable colors, which reflects his/her preferences. The ontology for map personalization is used in the color selection for portrayal data creation.
Keywords	personalization, visualization, ubiquitous mapping, ontology
1.	Introduction
Commercial map services are often used in communication tools such as Weblogs and Social Networking Services in Japan. However it is difficult to reflect personal preferences on their maps in spite of the increasing demands for map personalization in the ubiquitous mapping environment. Ubiquitous mapping is a function that people can access any map at anywhere and anytime through the information network (Ota, 2004). Geographic Information (GI) should be improved its reusability in order to meet those demands. And GI should be separated from portrayal data for improving its reusability. Personalized maps can be provided effectively by using GI with appropriate portrayal data which realizes the user preferences.
In this paper, we propose the map personalization mechanism by selecting suitable colors and ontology for map personalization (OMP). Then we implement a prototype system based on the color selecting mechanism and the OMP.
Figure 1 shows the structure of the prototype system. A user inputs his/her preferences. Prototype system selects a color set with their preferences and the OMP. The system designs and provides a personalized map from GI with arranged portrayal data, which are colored with the selected color set. 

Figure1 Prototype map design system
This paper discusses the OMP in Section 2, the color selection mechanism in Section 3, and the prototype system in Section 4. Conclusion is shown in Section 5 and Feature work is in Section 6.
2.	Ontology for Map Personalization
Ontology in this case is a data model that represents a set of user preferences, which are described with personalization elements (PEs) and the relationships between them. Every pair of PE is connected by an edge. Ito (2005) proposes the methodology to get personalized output by using proximities between PEs in the ontology, and proximities between PEs and the output information. Those proximities are initialized with knowledge as the common sense given by the experts, and are adjusted by user preferences. We adopt this methodology to map personalization.
If the proximities in accordance with user preferences are given to those relationships, more effective personalized map can be provided by adjusting proximities for each user.
In this section, we discuss the PEs for maps and the common sense as the default values of proximities.
2.1.	Personalization Element 
Map personalization is defined as the personalized representation according to users requirements (Kurokawa and Ota, 2006), and it should be carried out dynamically. User requirements are broken down into PEs with “5W1H”. We adopt “5W1H” for map personalization, because “5W1H” is suitable to report the real world phenomena which the user cognizes in his/her mind; for example the user requirement can be represented as “When the user uses the map”, “Where the user uses the map”, and “What the user wants to see on the map” (Table1).

Table 1 Relationships between user and personalization elements
Relationship with Map	Personalization Element	
when	time of map use	season, weather, time, event	
where	place of map	characteristic of the land (urban, rural etc.)	
who	map user	age, gender, occupation, feeling 	
what	object in map area	feature (road, shop, station etc.)	
why	reason for map use	position(present location, destination)	
how	media for map display 	media (mobile device, PC, paper)	
In this paper, “5W1H” are assumed to independent each other and are recognized as ego-centric relations toward objects. When an individual cognizes objects in his/her mind, “5W1H” is efficient to represent them. Thus the map design system proposed in this paper prepares PEs which connect with user by “5W1H”. And the system provides personalized maps by using PEs. For example, when an aggressive businessman wants to see a map to find the location of his client office, the system should provide a map which raises his motivation by using his PEs; his feeling in who is “aggressive”, and his occupation in who is “businessman”. Meanwhile when a boy notes in a diary about mountain climbing during his summer vacation, the system should provide the map which gives him a sprightly impression by using his PEs; the season in when is “summer” and the characteristic of the land in where is “mountain”. Therefore maps can be personalized dynamically by adjusting portrayal data with user’s PEs.
2.2.	Common Sense in the Ontology
PE relates with other PEs by semantic association in OMP. There are two types of the relation, one is specific to individuals, and the other is common among people who have same culture and historic background. For example, most Japanese in the season “spring” imagine the feature “cherry blossoms”. We define such common associations between people with same background as “common sense”. Common sense is defined by the experts and used as default values for proximities in the ontology. However those values should be adjusted depending on user preferences to reply user preferences.
3.	Color selection mechanism
This section discusses the mechanism of color selection using the OMP.
3.1.	Colors in Map personalization
Color is the most important factor in mapping. Bertin defines 6 visual parameters for map as below (Robinson, 1995). Arranging those parameter values help us to provide maps which satisfy user preferences.
•	Shape
•	Size
•	Orientation
•	Hue 
•	Value (Brightness)
•	Chroma (Saturation)
While Ono (2004) mentions that color (Hue, Brightness and Saturation) is the most important element in these parameters, and colors should be selected based on color harmony theory. Because colors evoke physiological, psychological and customary responses of users. Color sets give us different images with the combination of selected color (Kobayashi, 2001). For example, the combination of “Red, Black and Yellow” gives us aggressive image, while the combination of “White, Pink and Cream” gives us innocent image. Therefore color selection is an important factor in the map design.
3.2.	Relation between Color and Personalization Element
The association of colors with objects (e.g. season, feeling, feature and so on) is called “Color Association” in color psychology, and is used for culture comparison and generation comparison. It implies that PEs can associate with colors.
The color selection mechanism in this paper selects a color set with relations between the OMP and colors. PEs in the OMP are connected with colors directly or indirectly (Figure 2). PEs connect directly with colors for example, “Sea”  “Blue” (a. in Figure2). PEs can also indirectly connect with colors through other PEs, for example “Summer”  ”Sun”  “Orange” (b. in Figure 2). Each relation has proximities and these are initialized by common sense given by expert color coordinators.

Figure 2 Relations between PEs and Colors
Kobayashi (2001) defines relationships between feelings and colors as “Color Image Scale”. We apply it as a part of relations between PEs and colors. 
3.3.	Color selection mechanism
The color selection mechanism selects a set of 3 colors; Main Color, Assort Color and Accent Color. The color set consisting of these 3 colors is useful for presenting the difference of its image, and the color set is used in interior design, fashion design and other areas (Kobayashi, 2001).
This mechanism uses proximities of relations between PE - PE and relations between PE - color for selecting a color set. The process of the color selection using proximities is shown below.
1.	User input preferences described with “5W1H” and indicates the priority of PEs.
2.	The software selects colors which relate with a PE in the highest priority (PE1) as the main color, and assort and accent colors automatically.
3.	If the second preference is indicated, the software selects colors which relate with a PE in the second highest priority (PE2) as the assort color.
4.	If the third preference is indicated, the software selects colors which relate with a PE in the third highest priority (PE3) as the accent color.
5.	The software adjusts the assort color and accent color with colors which connect to other subsequent input PEs. 
6.	The software chooses and modifies the most appropriate color set by the closeness of those colors around the HSV color wheel and their angles of separation. For example, if the angle between the main color and the assort color is 30 degrees and the angle between main color and the assort color is -45 degrees, the software changes the accent color to the color of -30 degrees from the main color. Because these angles are said to be a harmonized angle set in the color harmony theory. If the main color and the accent color are same, the tone (the pair of Saturation and Brightness) of accent color is changed, because colors in a same Hue and colors in different tones may harmonize.  
7.	If the proximity between higher and lower priority PEs is lower than the threshold, the software stops searching in OMT.

Figure3 Subset of OMP and colors
Figure 3 shows a subset of the OMP and colors offered to a businessman thinking his summer vacation going to the sea. The color selection mechanism works as follows;
1.	If he requests “Sea” in Where (see Table1), “Blue” is selected as the main color, which connects with “Sea”. And “White” and “Yellow” are selected as the assort color and the accent color based on the color harmony theory.
2.	 If he adds “Summer” in Season/When as his 2nd request, the assort color is switched to “Orange” which connects with “Summer”. Because the proximity between “Sea” and “Summer” is higher than the threshold. The accent color is switched to “White” automatically based on the theory.
3.	If he adds the 3rd request “Dynamic” in Feeling/Who, the accent color is switched to “Red”, because the proximity between “Sea” and “Dynamic” is higher than the threshold. The system adjusts selected 3 colors based on the theory. However if he adds 3rd request “Businessman” in place of “Dynamic”, it is not used as the accent color, because the proximity between “Sea” and “Businessman” is lower than the threshold.
4.	If he adds the 4th request “Restful” in Feeling/Who. The assort color and the accent color are adjusted with “White”. Subsequent requests are used to adjust the assort color and the accent color while the proximities between them and 1st request.
4.	Prototype System
4.1.	Ontology for Map Personalization and relations with Colors
Figure 4 shows the structure of OMP and relations with color, and there are 3 relations among classes;
1. Relation between PEs and User
2. Relation between PEs
3. Relation between PEs and Colors 

Figure 4 Relations around Personalization Element
The relations between PersonalizationElement and User are ego-centric relationships described with “5W1H”. The relations among PersonalizationElements are semantic associations; PPRelation. The relations between PersonalizationElement and Color are associations that remind PEs from colors; PCRelation. Each relation has a proximity, which is customized by user preferences. 
4.2.	Map personalization mechanism
Figure 5 shows map personalization mechanism of the prototype system. 

Figure 5 Map Personalization Mechanisms in Prototype System
The process of map personalization is, 
1. Color coordination for selecting a color set.
The system extracts a subset of the OMP and adjusts it with personal requirements described with “5W1H”. Then the system get a color set applying the color selection mechanism mentioned in Section 3.
2. Portrayal data design with the selected color set.
The colors of map symbols are created with the selected color set. Figure 6 shows the improved schema from Kurokawa and Ota (2006) that defines the structure of map symbol. All symbol classes are related each other in this schema.

Figure6 Map Symbol Schema
3. Creating a map with GI and the arranged portrayal data by the selected color set
The system represents GI with portrayal data colored with the selected color set. 
 4. User assessment of the map
The result of user assessments dynamically adjusts and turns up or down the default proximities. The user impression about the provided map, “Good”, “So-so” and “Bad”, is used as the value of user assessment in this paper.
5. Tuning the proximities with user assessment.
The result “Good” turns up the proximities, “So-so” turns down them modestly and “Bad” downs them largely. Reflecting those assessments enables this mechanism to select more suitable color set for the user’s retry.
5.	Conclusion
We proposed and improved the methodology of map personalization by selected colors in accordance with the user preferences. These colors are selected by priorities of user requirements and proximities among PEs and colors. The default proximities are initialized by knowledge as the common sense given by expert color coordinators; however user assessments improve the color set more suitable for the user. The prototype system applies this mechanism and provides personalized maps, which colors reflect user preferences. 
6.	Future Work
Maps are personalized by a color set in this paper; however we have a plan to make an improvement through monitoring this prototype to evaluate effectiveness, and to provide personalized maps using more comprehensive representation by other visual parameters.

References
 [Robinson, 1995]　Arthur H.Robinson et al.: ELEMENT OF CARTGRAPHY,6th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , pp.319, 1995．
[Kobayashi, 2001]　Shigenori KOBAYASHI: Color Image Scale, Nippon Color & Design Research Institute,2001 (in Japanese)
[Ono, 2004] Kunihiko ONO,: Design for Map，Encyclopedia of Geographic Information Science,GIS Association of Japan，pp100-101,2004. (in Japanese)
[Ota, 2004] Morhishige OTA,: A Concept of Ubiquitous Mapping, Diskussionsbeitrage zur Kartosemiotik und zur Theorie der Kartographie, Vol.7, Technical University of Dresden
[Ito, 2005]　Koji ITO: Approach for Personalization Using Ontology, Workshop of SemanticWeb and Ontology ,vol 9,2005. (in Japanese)
[Kurokawa and Ota, 2006] Chikako KUROKAWA, Morishige OTA: Design and Implementation for personalized visualization of GI，SMF/UPIMap2006,2006．