Critique my tube map
 

Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Warning! The file is about 500kb and quite large: 5000x3250 pixels.

Notable changes compared to the official map:
* no North London line (I will add Overground when it will launch)
* "walk-only" interchanges between stations omitted (Shadwell, Bow
Road/Church, etc)
* no Regent's Park (it will be hidden until opening) and Shoreditch
stations

Any corrections are welcome!

P.S. And if you are wonder, why the world needs yet another tube map -
well, I have no idea ;-)
Well, actually I do have an idea - I'm praparing my own website about
the Tube and I needed editable map for it (to draw historical maps and
future maps).

Critique my tube map
 

On 3 May 2007 14:11:46 -0700, alex_t wrote:

Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Hmmm png, which loads quicktime, which promtly crashes and restarts the
whole shell.

I'm sure its nice but I won't be seeing it!

Steve

Critique my tube map
 

Hmmm png, which loads quicktime, which promtly crashes and restarts the
whole shell.

Oops! Something must be very wrong on your computer's configuration :-
S
I can open it in both IE and Firefox without any problems...

Critique my tube map
 

"alex_t" wrote in message
ups.com...
Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Warning! The file is about 500kb and quite large: 5000x3250 pixels.

Notable changes compared to the official map:
* no North London line (I will add Overground when it will launch)
* "walk-only" interchanges between stations omitted (Shadwell, Bow
Road/Church, etc)
* no Regent's Park (it will be hidden until opening) and Shoreditch
stations

Any corrections are welcome!

P.S. And if you are wonder, why the world needs yet another tube map -
well, I have no idea ;-)
Well, actually I do have an idea - I'm praparing my own website about
the Tube and I needed editable map for it (to draw historical maps and
future maps).

I am not sure if it is meant to be topographical or give some sort of
relation of proximities. If you are trying to give somesort of idea of
distance between stations etc, the distance between Uxbridge and the
Piccadilly line at Heathrow seems too great
If it is topographical, it is great - I like it - it once again illustrates
how poorly served 'sarf London' is

Philip

Critique my tube map
 

"alex_t" wrote in message
ups.com
Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Warning! The file is about 500kb and quite large: 5000x3250 pixels.

Notable changes compared to the official map:
* no North London line (I will add Overground when it will launch)
* "walk-only" interchanges between stations omitted (Shadwell, Bow
Road/Church, etc)
* no Regent's Park (it will be hidden until opening) and Shoreditch
stations

Any corrections are welcome!

P.S. And if you are wonder, why the world needs yet another tube map -
well, I have no idea ;-)
Well, actually I do have an idea - I'm praparing my own website about
the Tube and I needed editable map for it (to draw historical maps and
future maps).

I like it, though you probably do need to move things around a little to
better illustrate the true distances between stations. For example,
shouldn't Southwark station be shown closer to Waterloo than to London
Bridge? And the real Covent Garden is much closer to Leicester Square
than to Holborn.

One query is at Ealing Broadway -- presumably for simplicity, you show
the District staying south of the Central, though in reality, of course,
the District and Piccadilly are on the same tracks as they pass over the
Central, and then the District swings round sharply to end up parallel
to but north of the Central in Ealing Broadway station. Also, wouldn't
it be better to show Camden Town as some sort of interchange?

You also ignore national railways and trams altogether, not even showing
interchanges with them -- wouldn't it be worth giving some indication of
such connections?

Critique my tube map
 

I am not sure if it is meant to be topographical or give some sort of
relation of proximities. If you are trying to give somesort of idea of
distance between stations etc, the distance between Uxbridge and the
Piccadilly line at Heathrow seems too great

This is not a topographical map - this is a diagram (which I tried to
make more "lifelike"). The center and parts around Hammersmith and
Whitechapel are enlarged, the border areas are skewed.

Critique my tube map
 

I don't see why you made this?

The advantage of a systematic map, like Beck's tube map, is how clear
it is. The advantage of a topological map is that you can see real
distances and routes. This map combines them, but is less clear than a
systematic map without being topologically correct either! So I really
don't see what we are gaining here?

Critique my tube map
 

Alex Tereshchenko:
Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Notable changes compared to the official map:
* no North London line (I will add Overground when it will launch)
* "walk-only" interchanges between stations omitted (Shadwell, Bow
Road/Church, etc)
* no Regent's Park (it will be hidden until opening) and Shoreditch
stations

Any corrections are welcome!

Farringdon is misspelled, and the Victoria Line seems to be missing a
stop between Highbury & Islington and Euston. (No, this does not mean
that I've proofread the whole thing.)

I don't care for the way the lines artistically curve this way and that
as if the map was geographical, when of course it isn't, and I don't
like the rather widely spaced lines for the 4-track District/Piccadilly
and Jubilee/Metropolitan sections. But certainly these are matters of
taste, and they do help make the map distinct from LU's copyrighted
version.

Given that the interchanges are not being rendered geographically,
Whitechapel might as well be visually simplified by drawing the East
London Line station southwest of the District/Metropolitan Line one,
instead of northwest.
--
Mark Brader There are people on that train!
Toronto Sure, they're Canadians, but they're still people!
-- Paul Gross, "Due South"

My text in this article is in the public domain.

Critique my tube map
 

Updated with your suggestions :-)
I actually lived for while right near the junction in Ealing (saw it
each day from my window) - but I think my original idea of making it
simple was wrong.
As for Camden Town - I'll try to think of a better way to show it :-/

You also ignore national railways and trams altogether, not even showing
interchanges with them -- wouldn't it be worth giving some indication of
such connections?

It depends on whether I really want to make this map useful for anyone
except tube enthusiasts ;-)

Critique my tube map
 

The advantage of a systematic map, like Beck's tube map, is how clear
it is. The advantage of a topological map is that you can see real
distances and routes. This map combines them, but is less clear than a
systematic map without being topologically correct either! So I really
don't see what we are gaining here?

I'm making a website about London Underground, and I needed a map to
illustrate to stuff. As original tube map is copyrighted, I could not
use it - so I made my own. I don't think there is any serious gain
from this map - except that I'm going to update it very often, even
with smallest changes (for example making special weekend versions,
etc).

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:
The advantage of a systematic map, like Beck's tube map, is how clear
it is. The advantage of a topological map is that you can see real
distances and routes. This map combines them, but is less clear than a
systematic map without being topologically correct either! So I really
don't see what we are gaining here?

I'm making a website about London Underground, and I needed a map to
illustrate to stuff. As original tube map is copyrighted, I could not
use it - so I made my own.

There's a geographically accurate map at


I don't think there is any serious gain
from this map - except that I'm going to update it very often, even
with smallest changes (for example making special weekend versions,
etc).



--
Michael Hoffman

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:

I'm making a website about London Underground, and I needed a map to
illustrate to stuff. As original tube map is copyrighted, I could not
use it - so I made my own.

There's a geographically accurate map at:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png

which is available under a free license.
--
Michael Hoffman

Critique my tube map
 

Thank you! Fixed the errors, and improved Whitechapel.


I don't
like the rather widely spaced lines for the 4-track District/Piccadilly
and Jubilee/Metropolitan sections. But certainly these are matters of
taste, and they do help make the map distinct from LU's copyrighted
version.

I would put them together, if they would run on the same tracks :-/

Critique my tube map
 

There's a geographically accurate map at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png
which is available under a free license.

Thanks!

Critique my tube map
 

BTW, I can see at least two serious geographical errors in that map -
so much for correctness :-/

Critique my tube map
 

On Fri, 4 May 2007, Michael Hoffman wrote:

alex_t wrote:

I'm making a website about London Underground, and I needed a map to
illustrate to stuff. As original tube map is copyrighted, I could not
use it - so I made my own.

There's a geographically accurate map at:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png

FSVO 'accurate'.

We need to start collecting reliable sources on routes of tube lines, to
aid in preparation of genuinely accurate maps. I've come across old maps
showing tube routes now and then, but not all in once place.

Having said that, i understand that the OpenStreetMap boys are planning to
survey the tube - not using GPS, obviously: they're going to take inertial
reference systems down to ride on the trains. Inertial reference systems
consisting of a Wii controller bluetoothed to a PDA ...

tom

--
hypnopomp rapist

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:
BTW, I can see at least two serious geographical errors in that map -
so much for correctness :-/

I'm curious as to where. Although apparently they are only going for
geographical accuracy on station locations rather than intervening
portions of line.
--
Michael Hoffman

Critique my tube map
 

On Thu, 3 May 2007, alex_t wrote:

Any corrections are welcome!

Off the top of my head, i'd shift Angel west a bit, and High & I south.

At Bank, isn't the W&C at the northern end, with the Central line?

Don't like your Kennington - you imply there are separate bits of the
station for each branch, when really it's cross-platform. Ditto Mile End,
Oxford Circus, etc. I accept that you may have your reasons for this,
though.

Overall, very nice!

tom

--
hypnopomp rapist

Critique my tube map
 

I'm curious as to where. Although apparently they are only going for
geographical accuracy on station locations rather than intervening
portions of line.

Indeed, I was talking about the tracks between stations: as mentioned
earlier (on my map) District at Ealing Broadway is incorrect. Also I
think that Edgware Road 1and 2 are swapped (I always thought that the
Bakerlook one is the northern), Mornington Crescent is on the wrong of
the Northern tracks (I think), ...

Critique my tube map
 

On Fri, 04 May 2007 00:51:52 +0100, Michael Hoffman
wrote:

alex_t wrote:

I'm making a website about London Underground, and I needed a map to
illustrate to stuff. As original tube map is copyrighted, I could not
use it - so I made my own.

There's a geographically accurate map at:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png

which is available under a free license.

The source of the River seems to have moved! :)

Critique my tube map
 

At Bank, isn't the W&C at the northern end, with the Central line?

Updated :-)


Don't like your Kennington - you imply there are separate bits of the
station for each branch, when really it's cross-platform. Ditto Mile End,
Oxford Circus, etc. I accept that you may have your reasons for this,
though.

I need to "invent" something special for the cross-platform
interchanges - otherwise they will look just like shared tracks. I'm
thinking of circle split in half or crossed circle.

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:

There's a geographically accurate map at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png

Indeed, I was talking about the tracks between stations: as mentioned
earlier (on my map) District at Ealing Broadway is incorrect. Also I
think that Edgware Road 1and 2 are swapped (I always thought that the
Bakerlook one is the northern), Mornington Crescent is on the wrong of
the Northern tracks (I think), ...

No, Mornington Crescent is roughly correct, although the City Branch should
be a somewhat wider curve. I think showing the junction halfway between
Camden Town and Mornington Crescent would be more accurate... I think.

The obvious errors are at the cross-platform interchanges where the lines
are not shown parallel, notably the Bakerloo and Jubbly at Baker Street
which are portrayed as nearly perpendicular, but also at Euston, Stockwell
and Oxford Circus.

I have a suspicion that the Charing Cross branch passes east of Lambeth
North, but ICBW.

The Metropolitan Line has unused platforms at Swiss Cottage station, so the
line should probably run closer to or through the station.

The portrayal of Arsenal is odd, because of the great horizontal distance
between the station entrance and the platforms: they are trying to show the
station east of the Victoria Line, which the *entrance* may well be, but the
Picc tracks between Finsbury Park and Caledonian Road are far away
underneath the WCML's graceful curve.

The portrayal of Newbury Park is also wrong: the line runs N-S through the
station, as an aerial photo will show:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...6475&encType=1 .

They've got the Victoria line passing straight under Buckingham Palace,
which I don't think it does.

Critique my tube map
 

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
alex_t wrote:

There's a geographically accurate map at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im...d_full_map.png

Indeed, I was talking about the tracks between stations: as mentioned
earlier (on my map) District at Ealing Broadway is incorrect. Also I
think that Edgware Road 1and 2 are swapped (I always thought that the
Bakerlook one is the northern), Mornington Crescent is on the wrong of
the Northern tracks (I think), ...

No, Mornington Crescent is roughly correct, although the City Branch
should be a somewhat wider curve. I think showing the junction halfway
between Camden Town and Mornington Crescent would be more accurate... I
think.

The obvious errors are at the cross-platform interchanges where the lines
are not shown parallel, notably the Bakerloo and Jubbly at Baker Street
which are portrayed as nearly perpendicular, but also at Euston, Stockwell
and Oxford Circus.

I have a suspicion that the Charing Cross branch passes east of Lambeth
North, but ICBW.

The Metropolitan Line has unused platforms at Swiss Cottage station, so
the line should probably run closer to or through the station.

The portrayal of Arsenal is odd, because of the great horizontal distance
between the station entrance and the platforms: they are trying to show
the station east of the Victoria Line, which the *entrance* may well be,
but the Picc tracks between Finsbury Park and Caledonian Road are far away
underneath the WCML's graceful curve.

The portrayal of Newbury Park is also wrong: the line runs N-S through the
station, as an aerial photo will show:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...6475&encType=1 .

They've got the Victoria line passing straight under Buckingham Palace,
which I don't think it does.

All of which are fairly predictable given that they state the following on
the linked page: 'NB Routes between stations are interpolated and are not
geographically accurate'...

Paul S

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:
Last weekend I had nothing to do, so I've drawn my own tube map :-|
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Warning! The file is about 500kb and quite large: 5000x3250 pixels.



Any corrections are welcome!



South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Critique my tube map
 

South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

Critique my tube map
 

On 5 May, 19:38, alex_t wrote:
South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png


I like it - presumably it is roughly to scale? The Beck diagrammatic
approach is probably best for general use but it is very interesting
to see a more geographical approach. Not sure about the choice of
colour for the DLR though.

RPM

Critique my tube map
 

"alex_t" wrote in message
oups.com...

South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

The Waterloo & City crosses under the District and Circle just west of
Blackfriars. Bank is if anything closer to Cannon Street than it is to
Monument.

Peter

Critique my tube map
 

On May 5, 8:57 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"alex_t" wrote in message

oups.com...

South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

The Waterloo & City crosses under the District and Circle just west of
Blackfriars. Bank is if anything closer to Cannon Street than it is to
Monument.

Peter

Does the little line on the stations (like between the bakerloo and
Jubilee at Bakers Street) indicate a same level interchange? If so,
Bakerloo - Victoria lines at Oxford Circus is same level, rather than
central - Vic.

Critique my tube map
 

On May 5, 10:21 pm, Stu wrote:
On May 5, 8:57 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:



"alex_t" wrote in message

roups.com...

South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

The Waterloo & City crosses under the District and Circle just west of
Blackfriars. Bank is if anything closer to Cannon Street than it is to
Monument.

Peter

Does the little line on the stations (like between the bakerloo and
Jubilee at Bakers Street) indicate a same level interchange? If so,
Bakerloo - Victoria lines at Oxford Circus is same level, rather than
central - Vic.

Also Royal Oak is about equi-distance between Paddington and
Westbourne Park

Critique my tube map
 

"Stu" wrote in message
ups.com
On May 5, 8:57 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"alex_t" wrote in message

oups.com...

South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and
Wimbledon and Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):
http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

The Waterloo & City crosses under the District and Circle just west
of Blackfriars. Bank is if anything closer to Cannon Street than it
is to Monument.

Peter

Does the little line on the stations (like between the bakerloo and
Jubilee at Bakers Street) indicate a same level interchange? If so,
Bakerloo - Victoria lines at Oxford Circus is same level, rather than
central - Vic.

Central-District at Ealing Broadway is also same-level, as it is (and is
correctly shown) at Mile End. It's interesting that a deep level Tube
line has two widely-separated same-level interchanges with a sub-surface
line, despite not sharing tracks and having quite different histories.

Critique my tube map
 

In message . com, at
14:21:36 on Sat, 5 May 2007, Stu remarked:
Does the little line on the stations (like between the bakerloo and
Jubilee at Bakers Street) indicate a same level interchange? If so,
Bakerloo - Victoria lines at Oxford Circus is same level, rather than
central - Vic.

And in terms of spacing, the Bakerloo and Victoria are clearly very
close, and parallel at Oxford Circus.

Spacing is all wrong in Euston/KX area where the vertical scale is about
5x the horizontal (and the Northern is virtually underneath the Circle,
at KX, iirc)

Similar comments in many places - but is this map trying to be any more
than "join the dots"?
--
Roland Perry

Critique my tube map
 

In message , at 20:57:10 on
Sat, 5 May 2007, Peter Masson remarked:
The Waterloo & City crosses under the District and Circle just west of
Blackfriars.

It also leaves Waterloo heading north*west* before doing a sharp right
hand turn.

http://www.perry.co.uk/maps
--
Roland Perry

Critique my tube map
 

alex_t wrote:
South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):

Very nice, I'd move Gunnersbury up a bit to nestle more between Chiswick
Park and Acton Town, perhaps by moving Acton Town up the curve a bit
more, given that you have the district wiggle into Ealing Broadway
pretty much accurate it seems sensible to make the district better
reflect reality, where the lines to Richmond separate just outside
Turnham Green but run right past the back of Chiswick Park and then run
into a station barely more than a few hundred meters from the lines
running up to Acton Town.

Which is, of course, what the wikipedia version does. Though on it the
Thames ends mysteriously at Kew Bridge.

On a side note - are there any alternative geographical versions of the
london connections map? (a quick Google finds none)

Alex Ingram (who uses Chiswick Park regularly if he can't get a
Gunnersbury train)

Critique my tube map
 

On 5 May, 19:38, alex_t wrote:
South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/m_001.png

Also I made a special version of the map with tomorrow's disruptions
included (or excluded, to be exact):http://www.fxfp.com/get/tube/2007/05/w_001.png

Interesting; I've always been interested in maps. There are several
points I'd like to raise, but it's almost half pas midnight, so I'll
leave it until tomorrow.

In the meantime, if you haven't already seen them you might be
interested in two maps of the New York Subway. The official MTA one
is almost a graphical map, but not quite; Staten Island, which has no
Subway, but does have the Staten Island Railway, is much closer to
Manhattan than it should be for example. You can download it he
http://www.mta.info/nyct/maps/submap.htm What you see isn't the
proper map; click on the link near the top to download the PDF
version.

Some years ago, in the late '70s or early '80s I think, the MTA
published a Beck style diagramatic map, but the New Yorkers didn't
like it, and it was soon withdrawn. Somebody has done the reverse of
what you have done; he has made an unoffical diagram, contrasting with
the offical map. It's available he http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/subway/

He hasn't been able to bring himself to abandon the graphical layout
of the city to the extent that Beck did, and this has caused him some
obvious problems in certain areas.

Critique my tube map
 

I was going to criticise your use of 'critique' as a verb in the
title of this thread, but
http://www.answers.com/critique&r=67 ,
although referring to it as 'pretentious jargon', then seems to
suggest that it's becoming an acceptable usage... so I'll shut up and
go to bed.

Critique my tube map
 

On Sat, 05 May 2007 23:29:28 GMT, Alex Ingram
wrote:

alex_t wrote:
South Wimbledon and Wimbledon are much closer together and Wimbledon and
Morden are close too.

Updated (and fixed south District and Northern in general):

Very nice, I'd move Gunnersbury up a bit to nestle more between Chiswick
Park and Acton Town, perhaps by moving Acton Town up the curve a bit
more, given that you have the district wiggle into Ealing Broadway
pretty much accurate it seems sensible to make the district better
reflect reality, where the lines to Richmond separate just outside
Turnham Green but run right past the back of Chiswick Park and then run
into a station barely more than a few hundred meters from the lines
running up to Acton Town.

Which is, of course, what the wikipedia version does. Though on it the
Thames ends mysteriously at Kew Bridge.

On a side note - are there any alternative geographical versions of the
london connections map? (a quick Google finds none)

London Transport used to issue a "proper" railway map (Underground
lines in usual colours, all BR lines black, main roads shown) the same
size as the bus map until the 1970s but it tended to be of variable
availability from other than the few information booths/offices.

Alex Ingram (who uses Chiswick Park regularly if he can't get a
Gunnersbury train)

Critique my tube map
 

Alex Ingram wrote:

On a side note - are there any alternative geographical versions of
the london connections map? (a quick Google finds none)

The OAG monthly railway guide has a maps section, but I can't remember how
they portray the London area.

Critique my tube map
 

Stephen Furley writes:
In the meantime, if you haven't already seen them you might be
interested in two maps of the New York Subway. The official MTA one
is almost a graphical map, but not quite;

I presume you mean "geographical".

It's one of those maps that only looks geographical; although it
shows streets and landmarks as well as the subway lines, it has
significant scale distortions.

Some years ago, in the late '70s or early '80s I think, the MTA
published a Beck style diagramatic map, but the New Yorkers didn't
like it, and it was soon withdrawn.

1972 to 1979. The designer was Massimo Vignelli. In one important
respect this map out-Becked Beck: there were no diagonal lines.
Everything was drawn as either vertical or horizontal. Which meant
that in the more complex areas, a lot of lines had to zigzag to get
all the interchanges right.

The Vignelli map had touching parallel lines, up to 5 or 6 of them,
for each lettered or numbered train route following the same set of
tracks -- it's like the way the present Underground diagram shows
the Circle, Metropolitan, and Hammersmith & City Lines -- but the
stations were shown as dots *within* each parallel line, allowing
the same symbology to be used on sections like the Jubilee and
Metropolitan Lines where one route provides an express to the other's
local service (which is, of course, very common in New York).

One problem with this map was that it required a separate color for
every route, which is too many colors. They were labeled within
the stripes as well -- one advantage of having route names like "A"
instead of "Hammersmith & City" -- so you didn't have to consult a
legend to see that which train the blue stripe was. But the map used
since 1979 has used colors for *groups* of routes, allowing single
or double stripes to be used in many areas where the Vignelli map had
triples or more. It simplifies a complex system in a different way.
I like both designs.
--
Mark Brader | I passed a sign that said "you are here",
Toronto | but I didn't entirely believe it.
| --Michael Levine

My text in this article is in the public domain.

Critique my tube map
 

In message , at 01:50:33 on
Sun, 6 May 2007, Charles Ellson remarked:
London Transport used to issue a "proper" railway map (Underground
lines in usual colours, all BR lines black, main roads shown) the same
size as the bus map until the 1970s but it tended to be of variable
availability from other than the few information booths/offices.

I've seen a large (about 4ft square) geographical map that meets this
description, at the LT Shop in Covent Garden. Would have been about
eight years ago - not looked recently.
--
Roland Perry

Critique my tube map
 

On May 6, 12:41 am, "John Salmon" wrote:
I was going to criticise your use of 'critique' as a verb in the
title of this thread, buthttp://www.answers.com/critique&r=67,
although referring to it as 'pretentious jargon', then seems to
suggest that it's becoming an acceptable usage... so I'll shut up and
go to bed.



People have been verbing more and more nouns in recent years.