|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == Aufgabenstellung == | | i0rvAe <a href="http://hhpnmjbrnuxk.com/">hhpnmjbrnuxk</a>, [url=http://jfltvmnelail.com/]jfltvmnelail[/url], [link=http://udglrucrgniq.com/]udglrucrgniq[/link], http://twlwxewiewmn.com/ |
| [http://ieg.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~gschwand/teaching/infovis_ue_ws09/infovis_ue_aufgabe3.html Beschreibung der Aufgabe 3]
| |
| === Zu verbessernde Grafik ===
| |
| ------------------------------- <br> <br>
| |
| [[Image:nyt.gif]] | |
| | |
| | |
| == Ausarbeitung ==
| |
| | |
| ===Critics===
| |
| ------------------------------- <br> <br>
| |
| | |
| * If you are not familiar with those kinds of diagrams, they are a little hard to read at a first glance. It took me a few minutes until I understood, that "Total" is a company. Therefore the graphic made no sense at first. Of course, if you have the graphics embedded in an article this confusion would not happen at all. But still, if you have to study a graphics in a news paper (and not a scientific paper) for one or two minutes, just to understand it, you may just skip it. So in the context of a simple news paper this diagram may be a little to complicated.
| |
| | |
| * The y-axes shows the growth rate of the companies. This is quite easy to understand. What could be a little irritating are the circles that represent the total production of the year. At a first glance it looks like the circles are related to values of the y-axes, but they are absolutely not (only the center of the circle is relevant). The size of the circle represents information which is absolutely independent from the y-axes.
| |
| | |
| * Graph takes too much place because of the size of bubbles and the way how they are organized on y-axes. This together with title and description under Total bubble causes, that user misses possibility of quick overview and understanding of the chart.
| |
| | |
| * The size of the circles and the growth rate (location on the y-axes and numbered value) alone don't really give you a hint, how the amount of production was in 2002. You can only use the size of the circles to compare this year's production of every company with all other. But wouldn't it also be interesting if you were able to compare the oil production for each company with its own production from 2002? Of course, the growth rate gives you exactly this information, but not in an eye-catching way. It would be, if you had a second circle for each company in the background (with the same center) in another color. Now we would have the size of the circles, that shows you the production amount, the second circle in the back, that gives you an idea how the production amount of each company has changed and the position on the diagram which makes it easy to compare the growth rates of one company with all others. The advantage of this redundant information is the easier way of comparison - the disadvantage is that it maybe makes the diagram even harder to understand at first ('cause there is one more information layer).
| |
| | |
| *Beside the fact that the data presented is not easy to understand, it is not clear what information should be focused. The chart shows a comparison of the major oil producers with detailed written information about the situation of Total. This divides the chart logically and visually into two parts, which can confuse the message. In my opinion this chart wants to present relation between the size of production and growth rate. It is nice that Total is emphasized by different color, but it is the size of production what will be user focused on because of the bubble, not growth rate.
| |
| | |
| *Further, it may be criticized that the legends describing the circles are positioned on the right hand side and the numbers describing the percentage of growth are on the left. As most readers start to read from left to right, the focus is first on the percentage of growth. Then they go further on to check the names of the companies. But this is the wrong way, because the original question is about the companies and their growth and not about the growth. For this reason the reader lose time to get the information. In addition, the scale produces a lot of white space without information, as between ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell.
| |
| | |
| * The units for y-axes are visible only on first and last value and there is no general description of y-axes. User who starts to read chart from the 0 on axes won't know which units are used.
| |
|
| |
| ===Redesigned Graph=== | |
| ------------------------------- <br> <br>
| |
| | |
| <!--[[Image:improved_graph_oil_prod.jpg]]-->
| |
| [[Image:improved_graph_oil_prod-2.png]] | |
| | |
| ===Description of improvements===
| |
| ------------------------------- <br> <br>
| |
| | |
| *The data which should be focused in the first visual layer is clearly in front, underlined by bigger letters (percentage of growth) and different colours (green bars). The supporting components are designed with different colours and smaller letters to draw not to much attention.
| |
| | |
| * In the new version of the chart the scale is completely deleted. Instead numbers on the right side of bars show the growth. Production numbers where moved into bars where they are written in small letters for both calculated years. This allows a much more compact and clear presentation of the data and shows that growth is calculated according to production in years 2002 and 2008.
| |
| | |
| *As the sequence was defined by the scale, the companies are already in the right order. It also makes sense to use this order as group definition for the new data bar. The new data bar is now possible because the original circles are now replaced by bars, which are visually easier to compare.
| |
| | |
| * Bars for Total company are presented in different color to achieve user's attention. This approach was used also in the original chart, however now we have differed each important part of it's data particularly percentage of growth rate, production bars and the name.
| |
| | |
| * Now the chart intuitive communicates a clear message through a better presentation of the data, even less elements are used. For this the Data-Ink Ration improved a lot comparing the new version with the old version.
| |
| | |
| * Title and description was moved to the top of the chart where it doesn't hinder in reading the chart.
| |