Given this was posted to the list today, I find it ironical that Jetblue
sent me a link to this site today
*JetPaws*
http://www.jetblue.com/jetpaws/?source=EMJetpawsAnnounce_main&sp_mid=1318246



On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Jack Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm in agreement with Will, here. The sparklines on this site don't provide
> enough context to be of any use. They raise a lot of questions!
>
> 1. What is the time-span we are looking at?
>
> 2. As Will pointed out, they haven't broken out losses, injuries, and
> deaths, which are very different things. If you are a pet owner, a death is
> final. An injury is likely mendable, and a loss may only be temporary.
>
> 3. Obviously, a peak represents 1 incident, but each peak covers a certain
> span of time. If you look at ATA, which shows 2 incidents in a single peak
> with a flat top, and Atlantic Southeast, which shows 1 incident with a
> pointed peak, the time-span only differs by 2 pixels. Granted, I don't know
> the time scale, but it seems to me the width of a peak is inaccurate in
> comparison.
>
> 4. What does height of a peak represent? Judging by the airlines with only
> a few incidents, it has nothing to do with the amount within a single time
> unit, as they have full-height peaks. Midwest reports 4 incidents, but there
> are only three peaks, two of which are half-height, and one of which is full
> height. Then look at Continental with 52 incidents. Its sparkline varies in
> height quite a bit. This leads me to believe that height is supposed to
> correlate to the number of incidents, but the scale is being changed for
> each sparkline to make them fit the given height. If such is the case, no
> meaningful comparison can be made between them. They may as well just give
> the totals and leave it at that.
>
> Will Evans said:
>
>> Agreed, context and scale are important, and breaking out lost, injured,
>> killed as three separate information vectors by airline, overtime without
>> connecting the information points would have increased information density
>> while reducing chart junk.
>>
>
> Actually, Will, chart junk refers to graphics that aren't communicating
> data. A sparkline, by definition, is all data. There is no chart junk. So,
> breaking out each into a separate vector will increase the information, but
> not reduce chart junk. Whether or not it increases information density
> depends on how much space is used, of course. If they are overlaid in the
> same space, then yes, it would increase data density.
>
> Best,
> Jack
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [email protected]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to