Hi Philippe,

Here's my take on Buzan's guidelines:

"Start in the center of a landscape sheet of blank paper"

Most mind mappers follow this rule, but it is not inviolable. Several mind mapping software packages allow different conventions for laying out, for example, MindManager and XMIND.

Some do not even offer a radiant format as an option: Comapping, MeadMAP and ThoughtMuse offer only left-to-right tree diagrams. Comapping's publishers claim that users found left to right organization of topics more natural. I don't myself, but we all look at things differently. Nevertheless, the overwhelming number of mind maps found on the web are organized with the main topic in the center.

"Use a picture for your central idea"
A picture can express the main topic of the mind map immediately and is claimed to spark new ideas more easily. Nevertheless I see few mind maps that do not have the central topic expressed in words as well.

"Use colors throughout"
Colors can help with separation of sections of the graph, but for a quick brainstorming or creativity sessions on paper, too much concern with form can slow you down greatly. And changes in your thinking as the map progresses can set your progress back if you have already committed branches to colors.

So, to nuance this guideline: I think mappers should think about what they want out of the mind map. If it's on paper:
- Something attractive to share with others?
- something to help you remember the material covered in the map?
- something to keep for future reference?
- a colorful result, because that's your personal preference?
Using colors throughout in above cases will be worthwhile.

- a receptacle for a flood of ideas, where getting them on paper is important and doing so is bringing on more ideas?
- this is a draft that you know for sure you will have to re-work?
- your map is going to be printed on a black and white printer or photocopied and distributed?
- you need to show someone that you understand a subject? (when a concept map is an alternative)
Using colors throughout in above cases may get in the way, and is often of less value.

If you're working on a computer, we need to consider the audience for the mind map:
- something attractive to share with others? Use color.
- something authoritative to be shared with others? A project outline, for example. Use color sparingly.
- something for yourself to think about? Again, if the ideas are tumbling out, stick to one color and enhance it with color later if you feel so inclined. Re-working it with color may well bring out new ideas, not because of the color but because you are forced to think again about the structure of the map.

Changing the colors of branches is easy with mind mapping software. Most can do it for you automatically if that's what you want, so effort and speed need not be an important part of your decision.

"Connect your main branches to the central image and branch out from that"
This rule is what ensures that a mind map remains a variation of a tree diagram. It is one of the elements that distinguishes mindmaps from concept maps.

"Make your branches curved, organic and flowing, tapering outward"
This emphasizes the structure. It shows what is nearer the central topic and what is further away from it. As with 'using colors throughout', whether you follow this guideline will be a matter of taste and available time. In my experience it is not a major factor influencing the value of the map.

"Use one keyword per line"
This is perhaps the most discussed and the most polarizing of Buzan's guidelines. What you are mapping, why you are mapping, both affect critically whether this guideline should be followed. I've written extensively in WikIT (the mind mapping wiki) about this.

"Use images throughout"
For self-motivation, to motivate others with truly powerful graphics (see Attractive mindmaps), or to catch the attention of students, especially young ones, extensive use of pictures can be useful. We may not always read the wording, and you can also use images to remind yourself of topics that need to be thought about or researched more.

Nancy Margulies' Mindscapes are a powerful demonstration of the value that pictures can bring. But these are not always the circumstances in which we use mind maps. In a business setting, pictures, unless chosen with a good sense of design, or made with skill, can give a childish appearance that risks turning other people off the whole idea if they are not mind mappers themselves.

Simple icons or images used on a map can help readers find their way around rapidly, but the images supplied with mind mapping software are often not up to the task.

"Develop your own personal style of mind maps"
This gives a great deal of freedom in interpreting the other rules. It can be fun to look at other mappers' styles and try to imitate them while you work out the style that is best for you.

Often your choice of style will relate not only to your personal inclination, but to your purpose in making the map and the future use to which you will put it.

"Use emphasis and show associations in your mindmap"
In a sense, having lines flowing from the central topic outward to more remote ones, is all about showing associations. This Buzan guideline is about showing associations outside the strict tree-like hierarchy, often dotted or different-colored lines are used.

If over-used, mind maps can disappear in a fog of curved lines. In those circumstances a concept map may be more suitable.

"Use 'radiant' hierarchy, numerical order or outlines to embrace your branches"

From time to time, these colored outlines are used in both Buzan mind maps and common mind maps, to group items in a branch strongly together.

The choice of the word "outlines" was perhaps not an ideal one in this context. It refers to the colored areas that enclose several branches with a common root, and is distinct from linear lists indented (and sometimes numbered) to show structure, often also referred to as "outlines".

Roy
Editor, WikIT - the mind mapper's wiki
http://www.informationtamers.com/WikIT/