Are Our Transit Maps Tricking Us?

[CHamilton]

Are Our Transit Maps Tricking Us?

Schematic maps, by necessity, balance between detail and readability. “If you try to get everything in, it becomes meaningless, usually,” says Lance Wyman, who designed D.C.’s Metro map more than 30 years ago and is redesigning it to incorporate the new Silver Line. When Wyman, who also designed the Mexico City Metro map (as well as the logo for the 1968 Mexico Olympic Games), sits down to convert a wily transit system into something people can understand, he aims not just to make it readable, but to enable each viewer to describe it to a friend. The stations need to be sequenced correctly, and their intersections must be clear.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

I particularly like this quote from the article:

Keep the map legible—which includes simple station names. (D.C.’s had gotten rather long, which, Wyman says, "is always a struggle," though WMATA did agree to shorten more than half a dozen station names for an updated map unveiled this summer.)

Ya think? :giggle:

Are our transit maps tricking us? Well, we do create our own realities, and sometimes the 'reality' of a transit map is a rather nice reality... particularly one that has lots of rail! :lol:

 

[xyzzy]

I ride the London tube every month, extensively. Doesn't take long for someone to figure out the discrepancies between the official map and the reality. Besides, there are numerous resources on the web that provide practical augmentation of the official map. For the first-time visitor, the official map works quite well.