There is no standard or generally accepted terminology of aspect in the theory of map projections. The term is probably derived from the concept that a graticule is produced by perspective projection of the meridians and parallels on a sphere onto a developable surface. Developable surfaces are widely accepted, and it is almost impossible to find a publication that deals with map projections in general and without developable surfaces story. If found, it usually classifies projections as cylindrical, conical and azimuthal, and applies developable surfaces to define the projection aspect. This paper explains why applying developable surfaces in the interpretation of map projections is not recommended, nor defining the aspect of all projections by the position of a midpoint as polar, equatorial, or oblique. In fact, defining a projection aspect this way is invalid in general, and obscures the fact that the aspect depends on the class to which a particular map projection belongs.