Live from High Towers:

The Public Blog of Ben Traynor

The Lunchtime Review

In a series of articles, myself and fellow diner Claire Smith shall be traveling the length and bredth of campus in serach of the ultimate luncheon experiences, and sharing them here with you.  What's hot and what's not; where's fun and where's dun.  Find out and read the reviews exculsively here, on ben4towers.com.


Ok, so scratch the blog idea...

Some thoughts on a hobby of mine; topologically schematic diagrams and sucessful information communication.

Well, first off define everything.

"The term topology is... used to refer to a structure imposed upon a set X, a structure which essentially 'characterizes' the set X as a topological space by taking a proper care of properties such as convergence, connectedness and continuity, upon transformation" - wiki

"A schematic is a diagram that represents the elements of a system using abstract, graphic symbols rather than realistic pictures. A schematic usually omits all details that are not relevant to the information the schematic is intended to convey, and may add unrealistic elements that aid comprehension...In the schematic diagram, the symbolic elements are arranged to be more easily interpreted by the viewer." - wiki again

What the hell has this to do with the price of milk, you may ask.  Or indeed anything else for that matter.  Thing is I'm from London, everyday I went to school on the tube.  So at least 4 times a day my time was spent staring at giant tube maps.  Whether people realise it or not, if they spend a lot of time looking at something, even if not concentrating, their subconscience starts to pick up on various subtle traits and changes.  I spent eight years to-ing and fro-ing, and did start to pick up on the changes, even the minor ones.  Why for example, would a line gain a kink at one end all of a sudden, or why would all the text suddenly get smaller.

The tube 'map' (n.b. read diagram) was first drawn by an electrical draughtsman in the 1930s with the aim of simplifying a set of data to its most obvious and clear representation.  If you're spending your journey underground, the shape of lines above (and aside from a rough general orientation the actual location of many points) don't matter, since the only reference points under ground are the stations and lines and interchanges; ie. the points referenced anyway.

The tube map has changed majorly over time, not least being to keep up with the pityfully slow expansion of the network.  The integral style of the map produced is probably in its sixth major encarnation now (Early Beck, Late Beck, Hutchinson, Early Garbutt, Late Garbutt, and Corporate) but this is probably an over simplification; much tweaking has gone on in the mean time, both at the request of Londons various transport bodies, but also by the various authors of the diagram in an attempt to streamline and improve communication.

To understand why the tube map looks the way it does now, and also why perhaps this isn't the best it could be, some points must be made.  Before 1932, the 'map' truely was a map.  Geographic in nature, it showed variously the Thames, major road bridges of the Thames, and in the earliest examples roads themselves.  The last publically acclaimed cartographer of the system was  F. H. Stingemore.

Geographic maps do have advantages over diagrammatic ones.  For example, if one is traveling from Lancaster Gate to Paddington, using a diagram, one would probably catch the central to Notting Hill Gate, then the Circle to Padington.  Someone with a real map would instead realise there is only 300 yards walking distance between the stations, and probably decide to take the quicker walk.  Geographic maps have their disadvantages though from a practical perspective.  The density of the system is far far greater in central London than in the suburbs.  In order to make the central part of any map legible yet still adequately detailed, the corresponding size of the entire map would be massive; the majority of space wasted outside of the center aswell.  Not a convienient solution for the traveling masses to carry with them.

So, what are the solutions?  Well, the most obvious one is some sort of geographic distortion, making the center bigger and the outskirts smaller.  The problem with this though is that instantly because of distortion, it is no longer reliable to use the map as a map; there isnt a universal sense of scale.  So now you have a very untidy diagram, which is probably still cluttered aswell.  It isnt that much more of a leap of faith to stylise it totally.  The benefit of this being text can be included in a more regular (and thus easier to read) format.  This is what Beck proposed to the Underground Group in 1931.  There is of course a third way; namely to retain an expanded yet geographically accurate central area, and a totally stylised outer area.  This has been tried, yet not until the 1970's.  An interesting excersize, it regrettably never caught on; its principal audience could be considered to be tourists, however tourists tend to have a geographic map of central London and a tube map of the whole of london anyway, rendering a third hybrid map superflous.

Those who know anything about beurocracy in this country might not be suprised to hear that the map was at first rejected for being too 'revolutionary'.  However, it was begrudging later given a trial print run.  It caught on, and though Becks work on it was always in his spare time, he was increasing called upon to alter the diagram to meet the various needs and flights of fancy of the Board; most changes of which were later proved to be flawed.

The reason Becks diagrams worked and have attained something of a 'cult' status for draughtsmen and designers is because they divised a set of principals and then rigedly stuck to them.  Becks last designs are considered by some however to have gone too far in simplifying London and the system.  Whereas the lines in the 1958 diagram are possibly the simplest in terms of recognition to follow, the central area suffers from the constraints of a complex system, large font size, and very thick lines.  Sometimes too much distortion can detract from clarity.  Indeed, this over simplification was to lead in 1960 to Becks departure from the map.  His replacement, Harold Hutchinson, devised by contrast what he considered to be a masterful hybrid between diagram and map.  It proved to not be masterful, nor did it bring fresh life to the idea of a hybrid in this form.  It didn't last the year.  Paul Garbutt restored some sense of diagrammatic style to the 'map', and his style gradually evolved into what is seen today.

The problem with the map as it stands is, well, what does it stand for?  Stingemores were mostly map, Becks utterly diagram, Hutchinsons both-yet-neither, and Garbutts diagrammatic, but not as much as Becks.  The purpose of a system is often stated to be what the system does.  If Becks maps were taken to be the system, its purpose was to simplifying the underground network.  If the current map is taken to be the system, its purpose is to show that TfL have a large coverage of London and that they are doing their bit for DDA legislation.  And also to try to show all information that anyone might require about traveling, as long as its simple.

This purpose is incredably poor.  First off, its worth commenting just how much the reason for the tube maps existance has changed.  Whereas argubly into the late 80's the map was there to help travelers find their way around an increasingly complex network, the map has taken on a far more superficial role to promote the patronage of TfL, and its coverage of London and all contained demographics.  The commercial value of the tube map has never been ascertained, but it must be huge.  One can buy practically anything with a tube map on it; mugs, hats, g-strings, wallpaper.  Bear in mind too that the 90's also brought about the sponsored tube map; a fourth panel of advertising was added to every pocket map.  Also the multipul disapperiences of NR lines happened over this time.

As to what information is comfortably included though is anyones guess.  A comparison with a map from 50 years back (alright, 51 years).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scardy/229902073/in/pool-40301621@N00

• A Key of lines is shown
• Stations are shown
• Interchanges between LT lines are shown
• A grid (it own inclusion a recent one) is shown to help locate stations.

And the current one

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/standard-tube-map.pdf

• A key of lines is shown
• Stations are shown
• Interchanges between TfL lines are shown
• A grid is shown
• Zones are shown
• Interchanges with NR are shown, not just as NR symbols but as circles too
• Stations with level access to platforms from street level are shown
• Distances between some out of system interchanges are shown
• Problems with lines/stations are given in the key, referencing daggers on the map.

So the number of sets of information on the map in 50 years has over doubled.  Remember though, that the map area hasn't changed in size; system expansion has occured though.  To compensate for this and various changes in design the lines are now over twice as thin, and the text is at its smallest; both retrograde steps for something that is smaller than an A4 piece of paper to start with.  There is also now an abundance of text on the map and in the key.  The Psycologist and author Maxwell Roberts hit the nail on the head when he spoke of information pollution.

Looking at each of these additions, numerous flaws can be highlighted.

Zones.  Nice idea, but superflous.  Zones have been listed by each station in the gazetteer on the reverse of the map for many years now.  Also, each underground station by its ticket machines has a list of all London Area stations, their zones, and the standard ticket price to reach them.  The arguement for including zones is so that people can make an estimate as to how much their ticket will cost.  Why when there is a list of exactly how much it will cost before you travel?  You want to see it on the map?  Turn it over and read.  If you have to travel somewhere, you wont alight a few stations beforehand to walk to save the 40p extra per zone to travel, unless of course you know the area, in which case you would surely have known to get off earlier anyway?  And even if not, its still on the back...

NR interchange circles and symbols.  It isnt stated which region NR trains that stop at interchanges are in.  Balham, for example, has an NR interchange.  Give someone an underground map and ask them where NR trains from Balham go to, and unless they know already they wont be able to tell you.  Thus NR interchanges are useless.  It might be worth having the symbols at the London Terminii, only as long as the TOC and destination area were stated.  This, however, would not fit on the map, and possibly not on the back either.  Perhaps on the fourth pane though...

Stations with level access from the street to platform.  Quite aside from the fact there are so few of them for the issue to be considered laughable, level access from the platform to the street means nothing unless theres level access without gap into the train aswell.  To show that symbol to someone who can't or doesnt understand this technicallity is misleading.  I hope some non anglofonic wheelchair bound person sues TfL for false advertising after trying to catch a Metropolitan Line train at Uxbridge Station.  And also, theres a seperate map now that covers the whole issue in far better detail and makes a point of stating gaps and steps between trains and platforms.

Distances between some interchanges is actually a good idea; though its badly implemented and is outside the scope of the general purpose diagram.  For a start, not all out of system interchanges are shown, and even some that are are actually less of a distance apart then some in-system interchanges that arent marked up.  If people can't or dont want to walk a long distance for whatever reason, then surely they should be advised not to change at Charing Cross atall, nor between the piccadilly and any other line at Green Park, or the central and District at Bank/Monument.  And for that matter, what about the very long interchanges at Paddington or Hammersmith?

Service disruptions.  This one is tricky.  On the one hand, you want people to be aware of any disruption as soon as possible, on the other hand this kind of information is now-a-days announced at every station over the tannoy practically every ten minutes; there is always a board of planned engineering works with properly customised maps displayed, and the display of daggers all over the place on a small map is counter-intuitive.  On the current map the dagger can mean anything from somethings closed, something closed only at times, somethings crowded, you can interchanged between two somethings, you can't interchange between two somethings,  you can only use a wheelchair to use the step free exit, youve got to change here for something else....  No consistancy.  Whats needed are leaflets/booklets of problems and works.  That way they can use a bigger type font aswell.  Granted people that are deaf will not hear PAs, nor will blind (VIPs) see the trouble boards.


More to follow......

The update of the Beck Map

Ive given up trying to get it to show properly on this page so heres a link to it on my fotopic site:

http://images.fotopic.net/y0vngd.jpg

But that will, of course, show up small, so just visit my fotopic album

http://benedict.fotopic.net/p58631629.html

About me:

My names Benedict.  I'm a twenty-something student at Loughborough University studying second year Civil Engineering.  I'm originally from Ruislip near London, and, for my sins, went to school nearby at Douay Martyrs Catholic Secondary.  Some random facts about me:

• I'm 5' 9½", much to my irritation.  If you have a spare 2½ inches please contact me
• I like comedy films, and have a somewhat dark sense of humour
• If I could, I would gladly live off chocolate and Wetherspoons Mixed Grills
• I love computers, they hate me.  Its a mutual understanding
• I love to travel
• I hope to go into research someday

About this site

This site was originally started as part of an unsuccessful attempt to run for the position of Webmaster in the university halls I currently live in, Towers.  Despite not winning, I managed to meet a lot of people I would not normally have done, and made the effort to do things I wouldn't normally do.  I'm proud I took part regardless, so as a tribute I'm leaving the campaign message up here.

Later this month the Mighty Towers chooses their new committee, and I have decided to run for the post of Webmaster.

I have previous experience running and managing web pages, and several years experience with various programming languages.  For a while in London I ran a small business refurbishing and rebuilding computers, so I'm no stranger to IT and computing.

I've kept a low profile this year but would enjoy the chance to play a more active role for Towers Hall.

It’s important that Towers maintains its own unique identity next year whilst in Old Elvyn, and our website can help achieve this by tying everyone together.

So, come Election Day make the right choice, and vote Ben Traynor for Towers Webmaster.

Because the domain came on a year long registration, I decided to make a change and start a blog about myself, the place I live and work, the people I see day in and out, and the peculiarities I deal with.  I'll be uploading content soon, so come back in a weeks time or so!