Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#31

Post by bombcar »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #21

Not sure I enjoy it. It's aesthetically pleasing at first, but then it just annoys me. All maps have problems with representing distance and space in a 2D form, but this become a little absurd. As an artistic experiment I'd give him a pass except he explicitly said: "Let's get the geography as well because, with maps, shapes and geography are important. Let's try to make my map better than TfL in every way". He then…

This is the thing people forget about maps - any map is a falsehood, because it's not the thing mapped. It has a purpose and will bend various things to best serve that purpose. A subway map is NOT a walking map; it's (usually) a guide to the transit system and how to get from station to station.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#32

Post by latexr »

forinti wrote: post #30

Who actually needs a map? It seems to me that an app that tells me which route to take is a faster and easier way to navigate the underground.

Every time I take the subway or train I look at the physical maps in the cars. I can double-check the connections, plus periodically look at it to know how far away I am.

And if I’m in a foreign country, I don’t want to waste precious phone battery and data navigating some app which may or may not work correctly.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#33

Post by bombcar »

kqr wrote: post #17
latexr wrote: post #5

> He added: "I also thought, 'Let's get the geography as well because, with maps, shapes and geography are important. Funny. I remember watching a design documentary years ago where they made the exact opposite point: subway maps were trying to get the geography right but that became unwieldy and confusing, so the epiphany was that connections mattered more than the geography. That the way people were using the maps…

I'll never forget the day I thought I might change from one station to the next by walking, because they were right next to each other on the metro map – only to discover they were actually a couple of miles apart. Or the time a relative visiting the city took the wrong train because when they needed to go north, the metro map showed northbound trains as eastbound in that area. I think there is a compromise to be mad…

Part of the problem is balancing all the factors - a "star" metro like Stockholm is much easier to map than one that has actual rings and loops and similar.

You could perhaps have thin lines between "walkable" stations for the cognoscendi or similar.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#34

Post by deltaknight »

forinti wrote: post #30

Who actually needs a map? It seems to me that an app that tells me which route to take is a faster and easier way to navigate the underground.

Personally, I find a lot of nuance can be lost when just blindly following a route that an app recommends to me. This is particularly true when there are emerging delays on the tube and you need to figure out an alternate route, the time it takes until your app realises it needs to give you a different route is very annoying and a map allowing you to quickly figure out a different journey is great.

I also find that apps have very different idea to me in terms of my willingness to walk instead of bus/tube especially during changes. For instance, it’s often easier to walk from Liverpool Street to Moorgate for the northern line (say if you’re going to London Bridge) than it is to tube it to Bank or Moorgate. Until fairly recently, apps always told you to take the tube. I think this only changed because Liverpool Street and Moorgate are now properly connected via Elizabeth line.

Also when lines share tracks, looking at a map can often show you that you can use a different, quieter line for most of your journey then change at the last minute. For instance, when travelling west on Hammersmith and City from the city, it’s often advisable to take the quieter Metropolitan line for a while then change to the H&C you need when the two lines diverge.

Obviously for most people this doesn’t matter, but I’d maintain that maps of all kinds provide a valuable understanding of the network and allow people to make smarter decisions.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#35

Post by beardyw »

Interesting that Oxford Circus is the pivotal point. I use the tube regularly and it's the place I would least want to get to.

Also all distances to London are measured to Charing Cross (the actual stone cross I think), so maybe that should be the centre to be consistent.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#36

Post by dustincoates »

BrandoElFollito wrote: post #14
Freak_NL wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is " one of the most recognisable". That statement does not define which underground maps are the most recognisable in the world, just that London is one of them , which is undoubtedly correct.

Well, it is likely recognisable for someone who have used it in the past. I was looking for some features that make it stand out. The Peru flag is one of the most recognizable because of its shape. The American one because, well, America :)

Am I missing something? The Peru flag is a 2:3 rectangle, which is the most common flag shape.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#38

Post by BrandoElFollito »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #27
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #7

"The London Underground map is one of the most recognisable in the world" Why? How is it more recognizable that, say, the Paris one? Or New York? EDIT: Since there are down votes, I will clarify my question do that we do not jump into underground nationalism: I was looking for unique features that make it recognizable. As I mentioned in a comment: the ~~Peru~~ (EDIT: Nepal) flag is unique, this recognizable for insta…

The "classic" Harry Beck London tube map is widely considered by design experts to be a masterpiece of map design, and it appears in design contexts, not just in the context of a map on the tube. Over time this has caused TfL to attract people interested in designing for users of public transport, and they created a design system that is now licensed, and they do consultancy, so you will see "TfL style" design in oth…

Thank you for the answer (that is not a semantic discussion /end-of-rant)

I had no idea that the London map inspired so many others (among them - the Paris one I mentioned in my question), I thought that the design was rather a typical one for maps of underground services the same way as ground maps look more or less the same (at lest in their raw design). TIL.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#39

Post by sandworm101 »

I find london tube maps depressing. Having lived in a few modern cities, none of which have decent public transport, I envy the tube concept. It was implemented when such things were possible. Today, building even a short point-to-point overland rail link through a city regularly costs billions. Such a system as the london tube, built from scratch, would cost not just billions over a couple decades, but maybe a literal trillion over a century.

Re: London Tube map redesigned by Essex lecturer goes viral

#40

Post by itishappy »

forinti wrote: post #30

Who actually needs a map? It seems to me that an app that tells me which route to take is a faster and easier way to navigate the underground.

Reading maps is a learned skill. It gets faster with practice.

Also, important to keep both on hand in case of emergency. It would suck to be stranded underground without service or sense of direction.

Post reply on HN