You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2009.
I am sure most of you have noticed that there is something missing in the London underground map (September 09 edition) or at least that there is something different in it. If not, please take some minutes and look at it below:
Well, yes, the Thames -the entire river!- has been removed from the tube map. Weird, isn’t it? The more I keep thinking about it, the more I wonder why…
I did a quick research about it (articles, online newspapers, blogs), and apparently TFL wanted to delete all irrelevant information from the tube map to make it simpler because it was too complex and has become too cluttered (in simple words, that it had too much information).
So, I asked myself the following question: can a river (in the case of London the only natural landmark) be considered as irrelevant information in both colloquial and technical languages? For me, it was hard to find arguments to support positive answers to this question.
Moreover, London is a city that constantly refers to the Thames in different ways and people usually speak about the city as in two halves: over the river (north) and under the river (south). For both Londoners and tourists the river is an undeniable reference point and a key navigation device.
In this post, I am not going to discuss further why the Thames cannot be removed from the London tube map, but I do want to point out that this was not the best solution for the problem of complexity. Even more, if they have argued that tube map had too many elements, why they added an extra reference code box on the right bottom corner, instead of keeping all the reference information together in the right column?
And, was so useless the tariff zone information to be also removed? Now, will people know how much is their journey fare?
I know that the mapping information issue is not easy. However it is essential to know the difference between visual simplicity in terms of visual elements, and visual simplicity in terms of content and information. That means that not because of having less visual elements a diagram is less complex. The key point is to understand exactly which is the additional information in terms of content and what can be removed without the main purpose of a specific diagram being distorted.
Hopefully, in the December 09 tube map edition, the Thames will be back.
We would like to invite you to a design event focussed on the creation of diagrams and maps.
As a testing platform for a PhD research project, this workshop will bring together different design theories for mapping information.
• We will give you some guidelines to approach diagrams and mapping problems
• You will learn about diagrams design process insights
• You will learn how to create a diagram besides a specialised medium
• You will create your own diagrams
• The final diagrams will be part of an exhibition in London.
who? Advanced students and professionals from graphic design, information design and communication design fields. Amateurs who are interested in the topic of diagrams design are also welcome (Max. 20 participants).
when? Saturday 17th of October, from 10.30am to 2.30pm
where? 13th Floor Tower Block. London College of Communication
University of the Arts London
Elephant & Castle
SE1 6SB, London
This is a free event, but please RSVP on sheilapontis@gmail.com
dónde & cuándo? when & where?
Octubre sábado o3 – De 10.30hs a 15hs: Barcelona, España.
Carrer Santa Eulàlia, 21 – Piso1º – 08012 barcelona (Spain)
October Saturday 17th – London: To be confirmed
La participación en este evento es gratuita, pero por favor, se ruega confirmación a / This is a free event, but please RSVP on sheilapontis@gmail.com
Habrá un máximo de 20 participantes por workshop
Maximum 20 participants per workshop
Te espaeramos!
Looking forward to seeing you!
After Lazy Designers, I have received many suggestions and some interesting comments introducing new points of view and theories. Mainly, I have been trying to understand a bit more about three theories that have commonalities with my PhD main research theory: a rational thought behind a decision-making process.
These three theories are Later Thinking (Edward De Bono – physics), Pattern Language (Christopher Alexander – architecture) and Operational Research (methods related to software engineering and mathematics).
The theory of a Lateral Thinking has been introduced by Edward De Bono (1970). De Bono’s theory understands the making-decision process (reasoning) as a process of restructuring patterns (insight) and provoking new ones (creativity). In other words, new ideas are created or old ideas are looking from a different perspective as well as old information is putting together in a new way. A difference from rational thinking process, such as mathematical ones, De Bono explains that lateral thinking is not a linear process. In contrast, it is an organic process where the steps do not have to be sequential.
In terms of Pattern Language, Christopher Alexander (1977) developed a theory of creation by defining a sequence of activities (patterns) presented in all acts of creation. These patterns show us what we already know, but we don’t want to admit because it seems so childish, so obvious, and so primitive. Besides architectonic problems, Alexander’s theory has been used to solve complex engineering and computer science tasks.
Finally, the third of these theories deals with rational and mathematical techniques to solve complex problems (vertical thinking). These interdisciplinary techniques, called Operational research, use a wide range of mathematical and formal science methods, such as mathematical modelling, statistics, and algorithms to achieve optimal or near optimal solutions.
What all these theories have in common? In simple words, the need of some kind of rational and systematic method for developing new ideas, creating new projects and solving complex problems. Jones (1992) has discussed these same concepts from a graphic design point of view.
In addition, more closely related to diagrams, some authors, such as Cleveland (1994), Wilkinson (1999) and Kosslyn (2006) have deeply studied diagrams construction from a mathematical approach, and have developed different software to create diagrams.
To sum up, all these authors support the existence of a kind of system or mathematical component for creativity and innovation, and, at the same time, also support a systematised side of diagrams process of creation.
- Alexander, C. (1977) A pattern language : towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press
- Alexander, C. (1979) The timeless way of building. New York: Oxford University Press
- Cleveland, W.S. (1994) The elements of Graphing Data. New Jersey, US: Hobart Press
- De Bono, E. (1970, 1990). Lateral thinking : a textbook of creativity. Harmondsworth: Penguin
- Kosslyn, S.M. (2006) Graph Design for the Eye and Mind. New York: Oxford University Press
- Wilkinson, L. (1999). The grammar of graphics. Statistics and computing. US: Springer
