|
|
| Re: TfL finally updates London Connections map... (371251) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: TfL finally updates London Connections map... |
|
|
Posted by Max Roberts on Wed Jan 17 05:33:41 2007, in response to Re: TfL finally updates London Connections map..., posted by Rail Blue on Tue Jan 16 14:49:42 2007. 1) Circle Line in-joke: most passengers don't care about which line goes over which other, but they do care about being able to identify line trajectories. The trajectory of a double line (or even a triple one) is more easily identified and more able to obliterate the trajectory of a single line, therefore the single line should go on top: Psychology 101; better that an experienced user gets jarred than an inexperienced one gets lost. The experienced users will learn the new system, but there is always an unlimited supply of inexperienced ones waiting to gum up the works.2) Kink in central line: I don't like it either, but the Central Line needs one somewhere, and I would prefer to keep it out from inside the Circle Line. Making the map taller could permit its elimination, but would end up with Ealing broadway where Hounslow currently is. This map has just one bend that it could do without. The current official map has a lot more than one. 3) Heathrow: Why? How is the user going to be misinformed by this in any way. Is it even possibly to walk from T1/2/3 to T4 without getting killed or arrested? The map is not implying any information that could misdirect the user in any way (if the terminals were renamed TSouth and TEast it could). The 45-degree angle rule worked OK for Beck for London (but he couldn't get it to work for Paris). In fact, in pre-computer days the rule was essential. With a hand-drawn map, you would be permanently rubbing out and redrawing, the additional degrees of freedom that are given makes the design process very difficult indeed, every angle has to be thought about, and only a skilled designer can carry it off (most designers can't get a 45-degree map right). You should have seen my out-takes for this map, some of them are really frightening to look at. I know of no psychological or design theory that states that a single-angle map is easiest to understand, or the best for representing a transport network. Its just design dogma, like the 'golden rectangle'. Indeed, for Paris, I think that applying the rule is wrong. Here, the Metro lines often roll over each other and back again. In order to keep the relative positions of stations 'correct', and with only one angle and tight curves available, this has resulted in a horrible zig-zagging map with lines kinked all over the place. Each kink is an additional piece of information to interpret and acts as a barrier to interpreting the underlying structure of the network (the nodes and the links). With my map, the problem is that you are so used to the 45-degree angle rule, that when you look at a map that breaks the rule, it looks 'wrong', and you dismiss it. You need to teach yourself how to look at maps afresh. What I say to people, is look at this map (properly) for five minutes every day for a fortnight, and suddenly it will click, and 'make sense'. Its worked for everyone so far, including the MD for FWT Cartography. |
|
|
|