Teaching:TUW - UE InfoVis WS 2007/08 - Gruppe 08 - Aufgabe 2: Difference between revisions

From InfoVis:Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 18: Line 18:
[[Image:Tab2_8_bezirk_klein.JPG]]
[[Image:Tab2_8_bezirk_klein.JPG]]


==Kritik==
== Design Problems of the Table ==


*white spaces – There are no white spaces, neither between columns nor between rows.
While the original table displays valid data the data isn't presented well and so is hard to read. In particular:
*grid – The whole table is partet with one big black grid. It is not easy to find out witch data belong together.
 
*fill color – There is a background color for the whole table in blue. But there is no fill color for specific data or to group data. It is difficult not to get confused in rows while tracking one.
*White space – There is no white space, neither between columns nor between rows.
*table terminology –  
*Grid – The whole table is paritioned with one grid format therefore tt is not easy to determine what data belongs together.
**header - in the header is redundant information („einfacher Wohnwert“, „PS 2007“).  
*Background/fill color – The original table only uses one background color. There is no fill color usage to highlight specific data or to group data. Tracking a row horizontally becomes difficult, one might fall into a different row.
**Some information should be in the headline like „PS 2007“. The whole table is about PS 2007 and so the table is more difficult to read.
*Table terminology –  
*orientation –  
**Header - The header contains redundant information (e.g. „einfacher Wohnwert“, „PS 2007“).  
**the numbers in the lines „PS 2007“ represent quantitive values and should be places right.  
**Some information should be in the table's headline, such as „PS 2007“. The whole table is about PS 2007 and repeatingly stating the same information the table becomes difficult to read.
**alignment – percent should be aligned on the right side
*Orientation –  
**Percentage signs – They should appear on the right of the percentage value.  
**The numbers in the lines „PS 2007“ represent quantitive values and should be placed right.  
*headers – I don't know what exactly the headers should declare
**Alignment – the 'percent' data should be aligned to the right side
**„Wohnwert“ - is it the actual market place or something else
**Percentage signs – These should appear on the right of the percentage value.  
*Headers – It is unclear to the reader what the headers actually mean:
**„Wohnwert“ - is this the actual market value or something else?
**+/- % - is this the procentual change compared to the last year?
**+/- % - is this the procentual change compared to the last year?
**„gebrauchte Eigentumswohnungen“ - is it the value of needed flats or the value of used flats?
**„gebrauchte Eigentumswohnungen“ - is this the number of flats needed or the number of flats in use?
**was genau bedeutet „sehr gut“, „gut“? Eine Aufschlüsselung dessen wäre sinnvoll
**What charactaristics are represented by the values „sehr gut“, „gut“?


==Modifications==
==Modifications==
*The whole table was redesigned. Je nachdem was in der Tabelle als wichtig erscheint ist eine andere Art der Darstellung zu wählen. In der folgenden Lösung sind die Daten der einzelnen Bezirke in sich leichter zu vergleichen. ZB ist hier ersichtlich, dass in Braunau am Inn der Wohnwert in sehr guten Wohnungen.
The following modifications where made:
*headers besser gewählt – eine grosse und lauter kleine ueberschriften
*The whole table was redesigned. The table needs to be designed to fit its puprose. The following solution allows you to easily compare the seperate regions e.g. with one glance one can see that Braunau am Inn has a lower "einfach" percentage than Eferding.
*fill color – every 2nd line is colored
*Better choice of headers – One major and many minor headers, minimal redundancy.
*white spaces – are used between seperate bezirke
*Fill color – Every second line is colored, allowing you to follow a row easily.
*eine gesamtueberschrift (bezirk, wohnwert ...)
*White space – Seperates the different regions to improve readability.
*background color – neutral
*Background color – a neutral color which can fits most color schemes.
*bezirke fett geschrieben damit sie schneller findbar sind
*Regions are bold for quick finding.


==Improvement==
==Improvement==
*sinnvollere ueberschriftenwahl
Additionally, the following improvements where made:
*lesbarer aufgrund der formatierung (nicht in zeilen, sondern wichtiges auf einem haufen)
*A more sensible header choice.
*white spaces between data welche nicht zusammen gehoeren
*Improved readability due to a new formating (no longer row by row but clustered).
*keine schwarzen rules mehr
*More white space between data that does not belong together.
*nicht so viele daten in zeilen
*Minimal black line usage.
*vergleichbare daten nebeneinander, untereinander
*Less data per row.
*Comperable data can be found opposite/below each other.

Revision as of 21:01, 23 November 2007

Aufgabenstellung

Beschreibung der Aufgabe 2

Zu beurteilende Tabelle

Links

new Table

Design Problems of the Table

While the original table displays valid data the data isn't presented well and so is hard to read. In particular:

  • White space – There is no white space, neither between columns nor between rows.
  • Grid – The whole table is paritioned with one grid format therefore tt is not easy to determine what data belongs together.
  • Background/fill color – The original table only uses one background color. There is no fill color usage to highlight specific data or to group data. Tracking a row horizontally becomes difficult, one might fall into a different row.
  • Table terminology –
    • Header - The header contains redundant information (e.g. „einfacher Wohnwert“, „PS 2007“).
    • Some information should be in the table's headline, such as „PS 2007“. The whole table is about PS 2007 and repeatingly stating the same information the table becomes difficult to read.
  • Orientation –
    • The numbers in the lines „PS 2007“ represent quantitive values and should be placed right.
    • Alignment – the 'percent' data should be aligned to the right side
    • Percentage signs – These should appear on the right of the percentage value.
  • Headers – It is unclear to the reader what the headers actually mean:
    • „Wohnwert“ - is this the actual market value or something else?
    • +/- % - is this the procentual change compared to the last year?
    • „gebrauchte Eigentumswohnungen“ - is this the number of flats needed or the number of flats in use?
    • What charactaristics are represented by the values „sehr gut“, „gut“?

Modifications

The following modifications where made:

  • The whole table was redesigned. The table needs to be designed to fit its puprose. The following solution allows you to easily compare the seperate regions e.g. with one glance one can see that Braunau am Inn has a lower "einfach" percentage than Eferding.
  • Better choice of headers – One major and many minor headers, minimal redundancy.
  • Fill color – Every second line is colored, allowing you to follow a row easily.
  • White space – Seperates the different regions to improve readability.
  • Background color – a neutral color which can fits most color schemes.
  • Regions are bold for quick finding.

Improvement

Additionally, the following improvements where made:

  • A more sensible header choice.
  • Improved readability due to a new formating (no longer row by row but clustered).
  • More white space between data that does not belong together.
  • Minimal black line usage.
  • Less data per row.
  • Comperable data can be found opposite/below each other.
Retrieved from "https://infovis-wiki.net/w/index.php?title=Teaching:TUW_-_UE_InfoVis_WS_2007/08_-_Gruppe_08_-_Aufgabe_2&oldid=18121"