InfoGr: Subway maps (4)

[Erik Spiekermann]

   * Underground maps *   (discussion issue)

     message by:  Erik Spiekermann


(in reaction to the discussion about the London Underground Map)

It seems that every generation of Information designers and clients 
has to go through the same process in establishing what constitutes 
the best way of finding your way around in public transport systems. 
There also seems to be a certain amount of fashion involved: each 
generation refuses to build upon what the previous one has done and 
starts to re-invent the wheel. This results in abstract, geometric 
maps being in or out every twenty years or so. The truth is that 
there is room for all sorts of maps, depending on the use, and not 
on some theory or preference, let alone fashion. Maybe a little 
semantics help: Train maps are not really maps in the sense of 
representing a topography, They are systematic representations of a 
highly organized transport system. After all, more and more of the 
trains run without a driver. Nobody needs to look out of the window, 
because there are no choices. No traffic lights, no sudden stops, no 
turns and no landmarks. 

The case in hand: London Underground (and all the other maps 
designed after that model, including our work for Berlin Transport). 
If you try and squeeze all the Underground stops into a scale map of 
central London, you end up with the most horrendous clutter. You can 
find where you are, and where you have to go to, but not the way in 
between. The map of the London Underground is not a map of London. 
If you want to follow the journey from, say, North London to 
Heathrow in the West, you might have to change twice and travel 
about 30 miles. How do you want to show that on one map, unless it's 
gigantic? OK for posters on station walls, but what about inside 
trains or in pocket size maps? The way to inform yourself is to 
check where you are and where you need to go by looking at a proper 
map, finding the nearest station and using the systematic map to 
follow your progress through the system. (By the way: especially in 
London, the nearest Underground station is always given as a 
reference by any shop or institution). Who cares what's above when 
you're 200 feet (or 60 m) below ground? The simplified map allows 
for sufficient detail in the centre of town where there are stations 
every 100 m by expanding the scale in the middle and gradually 
reducing it towards the outskirts. This technique is even employed 
by makers of proper topographic maps, and nobody takes a ruler to 
them and complains about the fact, that the outer parts of a city 
appear far too small in comparison. Nobody except engineers and 
computer nerds who think only from 0 to 1.

As long as a systematic map has all the destinations in the proper 
relative order, it works. In our Berlin map, distances are totally 
false, but all the places are north, south or whatever of each 
other, according to their real position. When we did the map for the 
tram, however, we simplified the streets and had to use more angles 
than just 90 and 45 degrees, because people sitting in a tram can 
look out of the window and get a sense of whether the train is going 
to the left or the right. Bus maps have to be more topographically 
oriented still, as bus journeys tend to be shorter then train 
journeys, allowing for a smaller scale.

The map for Paris could be cosmetically improved, I agree, as could 
most maps (except London and Berlin, hoho). But what would you put 
inside the trains where you only need to follow one line, the one 
you're on? Passengers would then have to learn a whole new grammar 
anyway. And tourists have to learn the layout of a city, whatever 
transport they take. A topographical map tells them whether a 
destination is far or close. Once they decide for a mode of 
transport and get inside a train, it becomes totally irrelevant 
whether a bend is 35 or 45 degrees and whether the stations in the 
center are closer together than those on the outskirts.

Why don't people read all the stuff that's been written about this 
instead of making their own assumptions? There is plenty of evidence 
and research. Just because some new marketing guy somewhere decides 
to make his ignorance public by having another map designed doesn't 
mean there is any new knowledge on the matter.

Erik Spiekermann


[Examples of references: Everybody should read Edward Tufte's 
books on the subject, the two most recent ones being Envisioning 
Information and Visual Explanations. Ken Garland has written a book 
about Harry Beck's London Underground map, titled (not surprisingly) 
Mr. Beck's Undergound Map. And Information Design Journal, edited 
by Paul Stiff at Reading University, has published several 
contributions about the designing of maps.]
____________________________________________________________________

Moderator's comments / pointers to related resources:

Erik Spiekermann has briefly described their work for the 
Berlin Transport Authority in the book 'Information Architects' 
(Richard Saul Wurman / Peter Bradford), on pages 40-45.  
See also:  http://www.metadesign.com/projects/transport/bvg.htm

You want to see the maps ?  Look here:

   Berlin's current version of MetaDesign's map:
   http://www.bvg.de/anachb/linien.html

   The London Underground Map:
   http://www.afn.org/~alplatt/tubemap.gif
   http://www.londontransport.co.uk/system/area.html

   Paris - plan de metro (clickable to detailed neighbourhood maps):
   http://www.ratp.fr/Transpor.eng/Reseaux.eng/metro.eng.htm

   The Subway Page (large collection of world subway resources): 
   http://www.reed.edu/~reyn/transport.html

   euroMetro (up-to-date guide to European subway systems): 
   http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/robert_sch/euromet.htm


____________________________________________________________________

    To (un)subscribe, send e-mail to:  majordomo@wins.uva.nl
    saying:  (un)subscribe InfoGraphics

    InfoGraphics moderator:  Yuri Engelhardt <yuri@wins.uva.nl>
    For an archive of InfoGraphics messages please see:
    http://www.findmail.com/listsaver/infographics/thread.html
____________________________________________________________________