Guidelines for Standardizing the Design of Tactile Maps: A Review of Research and Best Practice

Figures & data

Figure 1. Production methods used by questionnaire respondents. Source: authors.

Figure 2. Different approaches for point symbol design. Source: authors.

Figure 3. Highly distinguishable tactile symbols to be used with vacuum-forming. Based on Nolan and Morris (1971).

Figure 4. Tactile symbols that were found to be the most discriminable during the preliminary study (Wiedel and Groves, 1969).

Figure 5. Selected symbols from the first described attempt to standardize tactile symbols. Based on James, (1975).

Figure 6. Highly distinguishable tactile symbols to be used with swell paper. Based on BANA and the CBA (2010).

Figure 7. Proposition of standardized symbols for tactile world maps. Based on Regis and Nogueira (2013).

Table 1. Miscellaneous.

Parameter	Values and sources
Orientation mark type and placement	Top right-hand corner of a map (Więckowska et al., 2012)
	Dotted upper edge of a map sheet (The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006; Štampach and Muličková, 2016)
	Line along a north edge (Thompson, 1983; BANA and the CBA, 2010)
Recommended sheet format	Should not exceed the hands’ range of a seated user (approximately 50 × 50 cm) (Olczyk, 2014)
	ISO A3 (de Mello, 2018)
	For tactile displays (either on a wall or a stand): maximum 60 × 100 cm with 90 cm clearance (for wheelchairs) (ISO, 2016)
Recommended linear scale length	Maximum 5 cm (Więckowska et al., 2012)
	2 cm (width of 2 fingers) (Gardiner and Perkins, 2002)
Maximum number of textures on a single map	4 (including plain background) (Więckowska et al., 2012; Červenka et al., 2013)
	6 (Regis and Nogueira, 2013; Instituto Nacional de Estadisticas y Geografia, 2017)
Maximum number of distinct symbols on a single map	10–15 (Rowell and Ungar, 2003)

Table 2. Dimensions.

Parameter	Values and sources
General rules
Minimum diameter of a hole (concave element)	6 mm (Bris, 2001)
Minimum size difference between symbols	At least 25–30% between the same geometry symbol (BANA and the CBA, 2010)
Point symbols
Optimal point symbol size	3–5 mm (Więckowska et al., 2012)
	4–6 mm (The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)
	6 mm (BANA and the CBA, 2010)
	10 mm (ISO, 2019)
	2–13 mm – bigger points can be mistaken with areas (Regis and Nogueira, 2013)
Minimum point symbol width (construction line)	0.4 mm (Bris, 2001)
Line symbols
Minimum line symbol length	12.5 mm (BANA and the CBA, 2010; Štampach and Muličková, 2016)
	13 mm (Edman, 1992; Regis and Nogueira, 2013)
	13–25 mm – depends on the texture used (James and Gill, 1975)
Optimal line symbol width	0.5–0.8 mm (Wiedel and Groves, 1969; Polak and Olczyk, 2010)
	0.5–3.0 (ISO, 2019)
	Maximum 2.2 mm (Jehoel et al., 2006)
	FOR lines thicker than 2 mm, double lines should be used (The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)
Area symbols
Minimum dimensions of area symbol	50 × 50 mm (Edman, 1992)
	0.5 in^2 (Heath, 1958)
Minimum dimensions of area symbol in a legend	13 × 13 mm (Edman, 1992)
	20 × 50 mm (The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)
	25 × 125 mm (BANA and the CBA, 2010)
Inscriptions
Minimum size of tactile character	15 mm (ISO, 2019)

Table 3. Distances.

Parameter	Values and sources
Between parts of the same symbol*	2.3 mm (Więckowska et al., 2012)
Between different symbols**	1 mm (Wabiński et al., 2022)
	2.3 mm (Nolan and Morris, 1971)
	3 mm (BANA and the CBA, 2010)
	5 mm (3 mm for highly contrasting symbols) (Więckowska et al., 2012)
Between 2 lines**	5 mm (Štampach and Muličková, 2016)
Between 2 parallel lines**	6 mm (James and Gill, 1975)
Between lines forming double line**	1.3 mm (Jehoel et al., 2006)
Between dots in a dotted line	minimum 2 mm (Więckowska et al., 2012)
	0.5–4 mm (Bris, 2001)
	20 dots per inch (Wiedel and Groves, 1969)
Between dashes in dashed line	breaks should be half of the size of dashes (Edman, 1992)
Between tributary and the main river	3 mm (Więckowska et al., 2012)
Between symbol and its annotation	3–4 mm (Więckowska et al., 2012; Červenka et al., 2013)
	3–6 mm (BANA and the CBA, 2010)
	6 mm (ISO, 2016)

* Maximum.

** Minimum.

Table 4. Heights.

Parameter	Values and sources
Minimum height difference between symbols	0.04–0.08 mm (Jehoel et al., 2009)
	0.5 mm (Bris, 2001)
Maximum number of height levels on a single map	5 (Bris, 2001)
Recommended heights for symbol types	Braille: 0.5 mm, line and area: 1 mm, point: 1.5 mm (Wiedel and Groves, 1969)
Minimum symbol height	0.2 mm (Jehoel et al., 2006)
	0.4 mm (Bris, 2001)
	0.5 mm or 0.3 mm for smooth symbols (ISO, 2016)
	0.75 mm (Jesenský, 1988)
Optimal symbol height	0.3–1.5 mm (ISO, 2019)

Table

Symbol type	Source	Details	Exemplary symbols (not in scale)
Points	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 point symbols produced using vacuum-formed plastic.
	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	The symbols shown, produced using vacuum-formed plastic were tested in 2 sizes: small (0.15 in) and big (0.20 in). For a larger set, all of the symbols were highly distinguishable^1, whereas for the smaller set, those marked with asterisk were considered as highly distinguishable^1.
	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 point symbols produced using paper embossing.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	Point symbols recommended for general use along with the proportionally drawn offsets that must be left blank.
	(Regis and Nogueira, 2013)	Proposition of standardized point symbols for global features to be used on small-scale maps.
Lines	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 line symbols produced using vacuum-formed plastic.
	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 line symbols produced using paper embossing.
	(BANA and the CBA, 2010)	The set of recommended and highly distinctive line textures.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	Recommendations for line symbols design to maintain good contrast between similar symbols on swell paper maps^2.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	The set of distinguishable line symbols on maps prepared with the swell paper method^2.
Area	(BANA and the CBA, 2010)	The set of textures that can be used freely on maps prepared with the swell paper method.
	(BANA and the CBA, 2010)	Only 1 texture from each of the presented groups can be used on maps produced using the swell-paper method.
	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 area symbols produced using the Virkotype (discontinued) printing method.
	(Nolan and Morris, 1971)	Highly distinguishable^1 area symbols produced using vacuum-formed plastic.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	Recommended textures for area symbols on maps produced using the swell-paper method^2.
Inscriptions	(ISO, 2013)	Recommended design and dimensions of braille writing. Dimensional parameters of braille shall reflect the technical correlations between the individual parameters. For example, if the smallest dot diameter and dot spacing are chosen, all other dimensions shall be proportional.
Arrows	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	The minimum shaft length should be 20 mm, arrowhead should form a wide angle (90–150^o) and arms should be at least 6 mm long.
	(Więckowska et al., 2012)	Arrowheads should be in a form of a triangle with a 3 mm distance from tip to end of arrowheads. They should not be presented as solid (filled) triangles.
	(BANA and the CBA, 2010)	Recommended arrow styles.
Miscellaneous	(James, 1975)	The first described attempt to create a standardized set of tactile map symbols using vacuum-formed plastic along with suggested meanings. The discouragement line suggests a line not to be crossed to prevent hazardous situations. Non-specified symbol meaning may be adapted depending on the map’s topic. It has to be explained in the legend.
	(Wiedel and Groves, 1969)	The set of symbols that were found the most discrete tactually in the study on vacuum-formed tactile maps.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	Recommended symbols for floor plans. Although commonly used in the country of origin, they must always be identified in the map legend.
	(The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee, 2006)	Recommended symbols for roads (single or double lines) and related infrastructure.
	(ISO, 2016)	The source provides examples of German and Swedish tactile symbols used mainly for orientation and navigation. Selected examples are presented.

¹ Criteria for a symbol to be considered highly distinguishable: (1) average confusion with other distinguishable symbols ≤5%, confusion with itself and other distinguishable symbols ≤10%.

² The printing method is not explicitly indicated in the source.

Nolan, C., and Morris, J. (1971) Improvement of Tactual Symbols for Blind Children: Final Report Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

 Google Scholar

Wiedel, J.W. and Groves, P.A. (1969) Tactual Mapping: Design, Reading, and Interpretation (Final Report No.RD-2557-S) Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

 Google Scholar

James, G.A. (1975) “A Kit for Making Raised Maps” The Cartographic Journal 12 (1) pp.50–52 DOI: 10.1179/caj.1975.12.1.50.

 Google Scholar

BANA and the CBA (2010) Guidelines and Standards for Tactile Graphics Available at: www.brailleauthority.org/tg (Accessed: 5th August 2022).

 Google Scholar

Regis, T. and Nogueira, R.E. (2013) “Contribuição para o ensino-aprendizagem degeografia: A padronizacao de mapas tateis.” 14° Encontro de Geógrafos da América Latina: “Reencuentro de Saberes Territoriales Latinoamericanos.” Lima, Peru. Available at: http://observatoriogeograficoamericalatina.org.mx/egal14/Ensenanzadelageografia/Metodologiaparalaensenanza/56.pdf (Accessed: 5th August 2022).

 Google Scholar

Więckowska, E., Chojecka, A., Mikołowicz, B., Fuksiński, C., Mendruń, J., Olczyk, M. and Rudnicka, M. (2012) Standardy tworzenia oraz adaptowania map i atlasów dla niewidomych uczniów Available at: https://tyflomapy.pl/files/33160/Standardy_tworzenia_oraz_adaptowania_map_i_atlasow_dla_niewidomych_uczniow.pdf (Accessed: 5th August 2022).

 Google Scholar

The NSW Tactual and Bold Print Mapping Committee (2006) A Guide for the Production of Tactual and Bold Print Maps (3rd ed.) Available at: https://printdisability.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/TabMap-Tactual-Maps-Guide-3-2006.pdf(Accessed: 5th August 2022).

 Google Scholar

Štampach, R., and Muličková, E. (2016) “Automated Generation of Tactile Maps” Journal of Maps 12 (sup1) pp.532–540 DOI: 10.1080/17445647.2016.1196622.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Thompson, N.R. (1983) “Tactual Perception of Quantitative Point Symbols in Thematic Maps for the Blind” In Wiedel, J.W. (Eds) Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Maps and Graphics for the Visually Handicapped Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers, pp.103–112.

 Google Scholar

Olczyk, M. (2014) “Zasady opracowania map dotykowych dla osób niewidomych i słabowidzących” Polish Cartographical Review 46 (4) pp.413–442.

 Google Scholar

de Mello, H.B.P. (2018) Produção e validação da Caixa Tátil-Sonora como ferramenta educacional de Tecnologia Assistiva para alunos deficientes visuais Niterói, Brazil: Universidade Federal Fluminense.

 Google Scholar

ISO (2016) ISO 19028 – Accessible Design – Information Contents, Figuration and Display Methods of Tactile Guide Maps.

 Google Scholar

Gardiner, A. and Perkins, C. (2002) “Tactile Book Advancement Group” Available at: http://www.tactilebooks.org/tactileguidelines/page1.htm (Accessed: 9th July 2022).

 Google Scholar

Červenka, P., Hanouskov, M., Másilko, L. and Nečas, O. (2013) Tactile Graphics Production and its Principles Brno: Masaryk University: Teiresiás – Support Centre for Students with Special Needs.

 Google Scholar

Instituto Nacional de Estadisticas y Geografia (2017) Metodología "para la elaboración de cartografía táctil mediante la tecnica de termoformado Aguascalientes, Mexico: INEG.

 Google Scholar

Rowell, J. and Ungar, S. (2003) “The World of Touch: Results of an International Survey of Tactile Maps and Symbols” The Cartographic Journal 40 (3) pp.259–263 DOI: 10.1179/000870403225012961.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bris, M. (2001) “Guide de l’acheteur public de produits graphiques en relief a l’usage des personnes deficientes visuelles. Ministere de l’economie des finances et de l’industrie” Available at: https://www.economie.gouv.fr/daj/guide-lacheteur-public-produits-graphiques-relief-a-lusage-des-personnes-deficientes-visuelles-n (Accessed: 5th August 2022).

 Google Scholar

ISO (2019) ISO 24508 – Ergonomics – Accessible Design Guidelines for Designing Tactile Symbols and Characters.

 Google Scholar

Edman, P.K. (1992) Tactile Graphics New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

 Google Scholar

James, G.A. and Gill, J.M. (1975) “A Pilot Study on the Discriminability of Tactile Areal and Line Symbols for the Blind” Research Billetin of the American Foundation for the Blind 29 pp.23–31.

 Google Scholar

Polak, M. and Olczyk, M. (2010) “Redakcja tyflokartograficzna” Przegląd Tyflologiczny 1–2 pp.40–41.

 Google Scholar

Jehoel, S., McCallum, D., Rowell, J. and Ungar, S. (2006) “An Empirical Approach on the Design of Tactile Maps and Diagrams: The Cognitive Tactualization Approach” British Journal of Visual Impairment 24 (2) pp.67–75 DOI: 10.1177/0264619606063402.

 Google Scholar

Heath, W.R. (1958) “Maps and Graphics for the Blind: Some Aspects of the Discriminability of Textural Surfaces for use in Areal Differentiation” (PhD thesis) University of Washington.

 Google Scholar

Wabiński, J., Śmiechowska-Petrovskij, E. and Mościcka, A. (2022) “Applying Height Differentiation of Tactile Signs to Reduce the Minimum Horizontal Distances Between Them on Tactile Maps” PLOS ONE 17 (2) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264564.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jehoel, S., Sowden, P.T., Ungar, S. and Sterr, A. (2009) “Tactile Elevation Perception in Blind and Sighted Participants and its Implications for Tactile Map Creation” Human Factors 51 (2) pp.208–223 DOI: 10.1177/0018720809334918.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jesenský, J. (1988) Hmatové vnímání informací s pomocí tyflografi Prague: SPN.

 Google Scholar

ISO (2013) ISO 17049 – Accessible Design – Application of Braille on Signage, Equipment and Appliances.

 Google Scholar