In article , patrick
writes
For instance, the Paris local maps show exactly where the Metro exits are,
and what you face when you get out. In London, someone decided it would be
better to just show a big round Tube sign, and once you get out you are
totally lost as to which street is which one.

At least some London stations have maps showing where all the exits are.
All neatly numbered, as well.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Iain wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote in
:


The only way I can think of making it more intuitive is to use
"citybound", or perhaps to highlight Zone 1 stations on the line
diagrams. Then again, using citybound would probably add new
confusion, and it would only work for non-central stations.


Especially as "The City" means one thing to those who live and work in
London and something completely different to tourists, who usually use it
to mean "the central area where all the stuff is I want to see", or in
other words the West End.

Iain

In London, "citybound would be different from "City-bound". I assume
that people who work in the City would understand that "city" meant
central London. It's probably all a bad idea anyway (and I'm quite happy
with the cardinal directions!).

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Newt wrote:

Agreed. Totally. Some of them aren't so bad. But then remember that
orientation-information is much better in Paris generally.

Agreed. I think that navigation around the system is rather easier in
Paris than in London because stations there tend to be named with more
precision than they are here. For example, Richelieu Drouot is at the
junction of rue de Richelieu and rue Drouot; Reuilly Diderot is at the
junction of Boulevard Diderot and rue de Reuilly. In London, Tube
stations are usually named after localities, e.g. Stratford, which can
encompass quite a wide area.

--
John Ray

In article , John Ray
writes
Agreed. I think that navigation around the system is rather easier in
Paris than in London because stations there tend to be named with more
precision than they are here. For example, Richelieu Drouot is at the
junction of rue de Richelieu and rue Drouot; Reuilly Diderot is at the
junction of Boulevard Diderot and rue de Reuilly.

And Stalingrad is at ...?

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

John Ray wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 3 Nov 2004:

Agreed. I think that navigation around the system is rather easier in
Paris than in London because stations there tend to be named with more
precision than they are here. For example, Richelieu Drouot is at the
junction of rue de Richelieu and rue Drouot; Reuilly Diderot is at the
junction of Boulevard Diderot and rue de Reuilly. In London, Tube
stations are usually named after localities, e.g. Stratford, which can
encompass quite a wide area.

That's because the Paris system is a great deal more compact than ours,
and stations are much closer together.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 31 October 2004

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , (Dave Arquati)
wrote:


The only way I can think of making it more intuitive is to use
"citybound", or perhaps to highlight Zone 1 stations on the line
diagrams. Then again, using citybound would probably add new confusion,
and it would only work for non-central stations.

Which would work exactly how on the Circle Line??

With difficulty. (I was really talking about the linear lines.)
Clockwise and anti-clockwise might work though.

Some of the Circle line signs do leave a lot to be desired.


Indeed.



--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

In article , John Ray
writes
Agreed. I think that navigation around the system is rather easier in
Paris than in London because stations there tend to be named with more
precision than they are here. For example, Richelieu Drouot is at the
junction of rue de Richelieu and rue Drouot; Reuilly Diderot is at the
junction of Boulevard Diderot and rue de Reuilly.

And Stalingrad is at ...?

Did you miss the words "tend to be"? Or were you trying to be clever?

--
John Ray

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

Connecting with another thread here about "lollipop" bus routes, this
reminds me that ACTV in Venice have, in probably a majority of cases,
vaporetto services in both directions from the same stop - to the
perpetual confusion of many tourists.

You don't need lollipop routes to confuse tourists like that. Try
Cambridge station with choices of destination like King's Cross and King's
Lynn or Liverpool Street and Liverpool Lime Street, both in opposite
directions on the same platform.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
newtonline{AT}gmail.com (Dave Newt) wrote:

Paris has colours, numbers or names (Yellow/1/Chateau de Vincennes-Le
Défense).

London has colours and names (Green, District).

So, from that point of view, Paris has three options to choose
whichever one you prefer; London has two.

The trouble is that Paris hasn't been consistent with colours. I remember
line 1 as red, 7 as purple, for example.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

In article ,
newtonline{AT}gmail.com (Dave Newt) wrote:


Paris has colours, numbers or names (Yellow/1/Chateau de Vincennes-Le
Défense).

London has colours and names (Green, District).

So, from that point of view, Paris has three options to choose
whichever one you prefer; London has two.


The trouble is that Paris hasn't been consistent with colours. I remember
line 1 as red, 7 as purple, for example.

I've seen maps with the "wrong" colours, but it has always been an
"unofficial" version (to avoid paying copyright I presumed).

I've never seen "wrong" colours on a current RATP map.