But so what? If that misunderstanding makes no huge difference to its usefulness - which is probably the case for most people, who use the diagram (and think of it) in a basically maplike way and get on fine - the misunderstanding is moot, neutral, meaningless. Spiekermann ( who also designed Berlin’s subway diagram) is right that we “misunderstand” the London Underground diagram when we think of it as a map. And if it’s use- ful in that way, aren’t designers’ definitions about what it “is” or “isn’t” simply academic? Psych!” And yet if you ask 100 people what the London Underground display “is,” I’ll bet cash money that 100 people will call it a map. But here’s the thing: the Underground diagram already does send very conflicting messages - it’s constantly saying, “I look like a map, but I am not one.
#The london underground map designer how to
I agree with Spiekermann to a point - I don’t find the London Underground diagram confusing as-is, and adding “some” map-like geographic accuracy (but not “all” of it) could easily send a very conflicting message to the user about what to expect, and how to use the display. Designing is often described as “solving,” but isn’t it more about engaging?
0 kommentar(er)
