4 ms·

I think it's crappy that all the other responses you've received so far are ignoring that you are comparing the existing NYC subway map to a map that claims to

I think it's crappy that all the other responses you've received so far are ignoring that you are comparing the existing NYC subway map to a map that claims to be better. the NYC subway map is better, so perhaps whatever design principles it uses would work better in Paris also. And if not, that might teach us all something about map-making, unlike the other replies to your comment which teach nothing because they can't seem to learn anything. peace out.

BerislavLopac 7y ago
Oh it seems we're not looking at the same map; the one in the article seems to be an old version. How about this one? https://www.inat.fr/metro/new-york/ https://www.inat.fr/metro/new-york/
- bobthepanda 7y ago
  That looks much better since it distorts relative geography less terribly (stops are in the same relative geographic orientation to each other as they are in real life, more or less.) The major issue I have with this version is the strange inclusion of the LIRR when no other commuter railroad is included in its entirety. And the main issue there is that it's relegated to a tiny corner of the northeast map, when in reality those are trains that take 4 hours and take you 110 miles out of the city. In fact, why bother showing that on a map of frequent, rapid transit, when the trains to Montauk, for example, run a handful of times a day?