"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , John Rowland
writes

For buses they used to have route maps which I found very useful, the
"spider" maps are not very easy to understand.

That's because they have been quickly and cheaply produced. A spider
map can be very clear if it has a lot of manpower put into designing it.

What's wrong with the present set of spider maps?
They serve very well for the purpose I put them to:
determining *which* bus will take me
directly to where I'm going.

I am surprised that anyone thinks that. Just tonight I noticed that the
spider map at Waterloo has Clapham Junction directly "south" of Waterloo,
and I can't imagine anyone looking for it there. Of course you can look up
Clapham Junction in the destination list and it will tell you which bus to
get, thus obviating the need for the map. The one thing for which a map
would be handy would be if you wanted to go some place for which there was
no direct route, and you wanted to work out which route goes near to your
destination, but the maps are too ungeographical to make that easy (or even
possible).

I think spider maps are largely a psychological trick on a dumb public, who
think that "it looks a bit like a tube map so it must be progress". However,
they could work if the manpower was put into making them more geographical,
but then again, why not just have a section of the geographical bus map on
which all routes from here have their roads highlighted and their numbers
ringed? It would not only help you plan changes: it would also let you know
which bus from here to there is likely to be the quickest.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes