1. In some of the larger examples of Sparklines, (i.e. “Bumps
chart” that is a tally of women’s collegiate rowing contests at the University
of Cambridge, England pg.56) are there ways to minimize the text further
without losing comprehension of the Sparkline data? At what point do Sparklines
begin to speak for themselves? Are smaller graphics embedded into the text more
successful?
2. “Just as Sparklines are like words, so then distributions of
Sparklines on a page are like sentences and paragraphs. The graphical idea here
is make it word like and typographic…” pg.63
Would the adoption of Sparklines into architectural language
be simple? Are there situations that Architects could face where Sparklines
would not be beneficial to use? If so, what are they?
3. Tufte lays out a series of guidelines on how to design and
produce Sparklines including: The Aspect Ratio, Dequantification, Production
Methods, Unintentional Optical Clutter, Resolution of Sparklines, and Resolution
of Layouts of Multiple Sparklines pg.60-63
Are there other factors that you can think of that would
allow Sparklines to become an easier to adapt method of communication? What are
they? Why do we not see data laid out in this format more frequently?
4. Tufte used examples of how Sparklines can communicate data within
cartography, brain research, molecular biology, 16thc. engravings, sports
statistics and economic/financial data. In what specific applications should
Architects use Sparklines? (i.e. Client information sharing? Site
Analysis?....)
5. “Why go to a special place to construct a data graphic? To lay
out a report? Segregating information by its mode of production, convenient and
profitable for software houses, too often becomes a corrupting metaphor for
evidence presentations.” pg. 61
As aspiring Architects, we have access to many software
programs that allow us to explore enormous amounts of data. Even with some
overlap in capabilities, there are still, in many ways, separations of word,
number, image and graph. How do we mitigate this moving forward?
No comments:
Post a Comment