On the Definition of Standard Parallels in Map Projections

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper introduces equidistance in a broader sense. It defines equidistance at a point, along a line and in an area, especially in the direction of the parallel and especially in the direction of the meridian.

- The manuscript is a well-written, well-organized and well-illustrated.

- It presents the issue in a clear manner (i.e., definition of standard parallels is not uniform in cartographic literature.)

- It presents the results of existing definition of standard parallels and proposes a definition of the equidistance. 

- the results of this work are important as they represent a step towards a uniform definition of standard parallels.

- It is suggested to elucidate the impact of the new definition on cartographic applications. An example of an application would help the audience to figure out the utility of the new definition.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1.The summary is relatively simple, and it will be more attractive to readers if it can add innovative points to the manuscript.

2.Keywords should be further condensed, it is recommended to write more than 5 keywords.

3.The conclusion of the paper can further describe its innovation and improvement.

The direction of the narrative is clear, rich and logical, but the English expression is recommended to find a native English speaker to polish.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript concerns the geodetic issue. The author reviewed the selected geodetic literature with definitions of standard parallels. The research problem noticed by the author is that there are different definitions of “standard parallels” in the sources. The author tried to make an order with definitions and proposed a clear distinction between equidistant parallels in the direction of parallels, equidistant parallels in the direction of the meridians and standard parallels. The text would be interesting to readers who deal with map projections and represents the author’s point of view.

It is recommended to remove numerous repetitions in the text, for example in lines 5-8: "There is no unique and generally accepted definition of standard parallels in cartographic literature. For some authors, a standard line is a line along which there is no distortion, and for others it is a line along which there is no distortion of length. At the same time, it is forgotten that the length distortions at any point generally change and depend on the direction" and the same in lines 435-440: "The definition of standard parallels is not uniform in cartographic literature. For some authors, a standard line is a line along which there are no distortions, i.e. there are no distortions of length at every point and in every direction, and then no distortion of areas or angles. For others, it is such a line along which there is no distortion of lengths only in the direction of that line. At the same time, it is forgotten that the linear distortions at any point generally change and depend on the direction" and others.

It is recommended to remove sentences written not in English, e.g. in lines 51-52, 54-55, 62-65.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

Through an in-depth analysis of the cartographic literature on the topic, the Author evidences that the definition of a standard line and a standard parallel is not universally accepted and there is terminological confusion. The Author therefore seeks a solution to the observed problem, proposing a possible disambiguation of the definitions.

The major strength is that this paper introduces equidistance in a broader sense, being defined at a point, along a line and in an area, especially in the direction of the parallel and especially in the direction of the meridian. On the basis of strong theoretical considerations, clearly illustrated through very clarifying examples, the Author recommends making a clear distinction between equidistant parallels in the direction of parallels, equidistant parallels in the direction of the meridians and standard parallels. This is in order to avoid the frequent and widespread misunderstandings of standard parallels both in the theory of map projections and in their teaching.

The topic is virtually suitable for publication in the “International Journal of Geo-Information”.

This paper is very interesting, very well conducted and of general relevance. Is also very well-written and I have very little to add, to evaluate its scientific resonance. The author express clearly enough the purposes of the study and its applications as well as its novelty. The topic has been addressed in an appropriate manner and in the context of previous literature, describing the hypotheses and results in terms of the current state of the field. In particular, the introduction is very detailed and almost sound as a review. I really appreciated the idea of ​​quoting the Russian and German texts in the original language, in order to frame the problem also from a semantic point of view. I found the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented.

If I really have to find a flaw, it is that many parts of the abstract are repeated as they are in the conclusions (or perhaps it would be more accurate to say the opposite): perhaps it would be appropriate to make a little effort to make the abstract a little more captivating and - in any case - not a simple copy of the conclusions.

I found figure very powerful and illuminating and I see no major flaws.

Many of references are recent (within the last 10 years), as well as a certain number of older references, which is normal considering that the introduction is almost a review. Self-quotations are largely kept within the limit of about 10%.

Although I am not an english-native speaker, I found the the English language appropriate, understandable and good enough for the most of the parts.

I was very enthusiastic about reading this manuscript and I am very happy to have had the pleasure of reviewing it. My final recommendation is that the paper can be accepted for publication in the “International Journal of Geo-Information” in its present state.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf