Hi Clive,
Thanks for the detailed study. Your message was good reading and thank you
for the references.
In thinking through the Underground map and similar kinds of design there
seems to be a cultural issue that doesn't seem to be flagged in the design
literature.
Beck was an engineering draughtsperson. Draughtpersons use and are fluent in
a LOT of different types of symbolic diagram formats.
This use of a large number of different types of diagram formats is a fairly
hidden aspect of engineering design. From observation, people from outside
engineering design appear to think that only a very small number of type of
diagram are used : engineering drawing, electrical diagram, flow chart
perhaps.
To put it in perspective, a relatively small engineering design project may
use dozens of different types of diagram format - and design projects in
different fields use different types and mixes of diagram formats . (I've
just added up 34 different diagram formats on a relatively small project I'm
working on).
Seems likely most engineering designers/draughtspersons will be expert with
say 50 diagram formats - all different from the idea of 'map'. This is
especially so for a draughtsperson like Beck working in infrastructure
involving above and below ground mechanical and electrical works.
Analyses of Beck's work and the London Underground map seem to be only by
graphic designers and information designers who seem to interpret Beck's use
of diagrams in a culturally different way from how a draughtsperson or
engineering designer would see them .
I'd be grateful if anyone would send me details of texts in graphic design
and/or information design that catalogue and analyse the use in engineering
design of the large number of different types of diagramming and drawing
formats found in the different fields of engineering design/drafting
practice.
Best wishes and thanks in advance,
Terry
====
Clive wrote:
<>but on the principal of available simplicity and designing with what
resources there are to hand, the usual (and persausive) metaphor for the LUD
are electrical circuit diagrams (flows, resistances) and this for the very
good reason that Henry Beck was both before his invention of the LUD and
after it employed as a draughtsman by the LPTB working amongst other things
on electrical circuits. ...
NB. Anyone wanting to follow these issues further should look at three
magnificent texts on the LUD and its context:
Nikolaus Pevsner's essay on Frank Pick and the LPTB (published in the second
volume of P's collected lectures and essays, Studies in Art, Architecture
and Design, Vol 2 Victorian and After); John A Walker's marvelous little
semantic analysis of the diagram (from Icographic journal c.1981 as I
recall) and Ken Garland's short but detailed book on the history of the
diagram.
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|