3 ms·
That's why I gave figures for both overall average and focused central areas (not sure how you found that misleading)... :) Density figures can be tricky, no m
by snogglethorpe 13y ago
That's why I gave figures for both overall average and focused central areas (not sure how you found that misleading)... :)
Density figures can be tricky, no matter what the area used, because what's useful for one purpose isn't useful for another. While average density over a large area doesn't accurately reflect living condition in smaller sub-areas, it is useful for other purposes ("is the city full yet?" :). Generally it's useful to have both large-area averages and focused figures for popular subareas, maps to indicate density distribution, etc.
[As I noted in my original comment, Tokyo is notable for the unusual consistency of its population distribution, at least within the central (but still large) 23-ku area.]
- tptacek 13y agoYou put the aggregate for Hong Kong, which is a region and not a city, alongside the numbers for San Francisco, Tokyo, and Manhattan. Was the point I was making.
- snogglethorpe 13y agoEr, sure, whatever. I don't know much about HK in particular, but official designations of "city" boundaries are often pretty arbitrary, and can be downright misleading (e.g. don't reflect the distribution of population/commerce/transportation), so I dunno exactly where to draw the line... When in doubt it seems better to include more information. [Tokyo "the city" is much larger than HK "the region", but also includes enormous sparsely populated areas... and on a practical level, the entire Tokyo-Kawasaki-Yokohama area is really just one humungous city, with a completely different shape than anything official... deciding where to draw the line is difficult, and depends a lot on what your end goal is.]
- tptacek 13y agoIt wasn't a big deal either way, I'm just nerding out.