Field Journal #7: Prototype for the modern map

From this week's reading, the one thing that stood out the most to me was the prototype for the modern map made by draftsman Henry C. Beck of the London Underground subway lines. What I found interesting about it is that it hasn't changed much in comparison to some of the maps that are readily available for public transportation in the present day.

London Underground Map http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/2443.aspx

BART map http://zyxyvy.wordpress.com/2012/04/14/the-bart-map-to-scale/

With the BART map above, it is similar in it's color coded railways, legend/reference box, map name, city/street stops. It's not as geometrically angular like the London Underground and it's more detailed, showing parts of the ocean, green areas, surrounding highways and cities, etc. There is another map of the BART route that is more simplified without some of the details shown in the map above and is more angular in comparison to the BART map above. This demonstrates that the subway map for the London Underground's design has been the standard model for public transportation to this day. In some designs it can be seen as stagnant in comparison to everything else in graphic design, with the exception of maps in digital form, GPS, etc.

Transit map http://sanjoseuu.org/AboutUs/publicTransit.html

This is a portion of the light rail/bus routes in Downtown San Jose. What is notable aside from the color coded routes and the names of certain buildings/places are the bus numbers, grey spaces for buildings, and bathroom locations. Similar to the BART map, this however can get a little more confusing due to the fact of all the numbers, crossing colored routes, basically a lot of things going on the map. It might be because it is downtown which can seem cluttered, but nonetheless, has carried the same attributes as the London Underground map.

Now the question is how come the layout of public transportation maps haven't changed much, outside of the intricate details? My assumption is that it's already efficient as it is. Any more additional details would confuse viewers, making maps difficult to interpret. I guess it's along the lines of the saying "Why fix it if it isn't broken," which is true to a certain degree. A map is supposed to help/guide those in need of it, and these transportation maps fulfills that goal. Adding any other things would stray away from its purpose.