Teaching:TUW - UE InfoVis WS 2005/06 - Gruppe G8 - Aufgabe 2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
|valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|spot description (background) | |valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|spot description (background) | ||
|valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|Contrast is not too good with the background of the boxes. | |valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|Contrast is not too good with the background of the boxes. | ||
|valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|Whitening the background beneath the text for raising the contrast value for extra clear reading. On the other hand this is keeping the context (background) reasonable recognizeable. | |valign="top" bgcolor="#eeeeee"|Whitening the background beneath the text for raising the contrast value for extra clear reading. On the other hand this is keeping the context (background) reasonable recognizeable. [2] | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-0-Defs.pdf | http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-0-Defs.pdf | ||
[Miksch, 2005] Focus + Kontext, Course Transparencies, p.5 ff, Retrieved at: October 2005.<br> | [2] [Miksch, 2005] Focus + Kontext, Course Transparencies, p.5 ff, Retrieved at: October 2005.<br> | ||
http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-1.pdf | http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-1.pdf | ||
Revision as of 22:39, 25 October 2005
Poor Graphic
Corrected Graphic
Informational Content Comparison
Element | Poor Graphic | Worked Graphic |
---|---|---|
legend | The legend is inconsistent |
The symbols are continous and follow the rules for representing non-metric but ordinary classes of ranges [1][Miksch, 2005] Moreover all 4 symbols have evaluated out of the same basic symbol (snowflake), and are thus consistent. |
background (radial gradient) | Is distracting the viewer, keeps no additional information. | Was omitted from the worked version. |
background (map, the image) | Keeps no information (for the data of snowfall) | Was exchanged by a sattelite view of Idaho, giving an idea about the ladscape around the single spots. Since the graphic is probably for touristic use, this information is useful for the potential clients (viewers). |
spot indicators (form) | Are inconsistent and teh fourth one does not give a good idea where the center actually is (assymetric). | The new symbol has a clear center point, representing the spot on the map where the viewer can expect the place named. |
spot indicators (color) | The spot indicators are all of a different color, which can not at all be related to the amount of snow it should represent. | The color keeps no informations, so the attribute is dumped. |
spot description (text) | The text is in white, which has a too low contrast most of the time due to the irregular color of the background image. | The text is written in simple black color. |
spot description (background) | Contrast is not too good with the background of the boxes. | Whitening the background beneath the text for raising the contrast value for extra clear reading. On the other hand this is keeping the context (background) reasonable recognizeable. [2] |
[1] [Miksch, 2005] Basic Understanding of Information Visualisation, Course Transparencies, p.29, Retrieved at: October 2005.
http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-0-Defs.pdf
[2] [Miksch, 2005] Focus + Kontext, Course Transparencies, p.5 ff, Retrieved at: October 2005.
http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/wien/vu-infovis/PDF-Files/InfoVis-1.pdf