Thanks for adding this contemporary critique. Each of his comments are valid, but the combined result kills the image—it's something that would not attract attention. (See everyone who says Florence Nightingale's charts should have been line graphs.) I prefer the original WSJ, imperfections and all.
There may be a middle ground where the major comments are addressed and the original vis is not "ruined". I think the next discussion step may go in the direction of task-oriented data vis versus info vis.. Comparing measles, polio, etc becomes also pretty strenuous. E.g., do we want to support comparison?
What beautiful colors for the sundries!
In the measles chart, one of the many issues I remember: NA values weren't properly handled. Here's another take: https://www.significancemagazine.com/science/499-revisiting-the-vaccine-visualizations
Thanks for adding this contemporary critique. Each of his comments are valid, but the combined result kills the image—it's something that would not attract attention. (See everyone who says Florence Nightingale's charts should have been line graphs.) I prefer the original WSJ, imperfections and all.
There may be a middle ground where the major comments are addressed and the original vis is not "ruined". I think the next discussion step may go in the direction of task-oriented data vis versus info vis.. Comparing measles, polio, etc becomes also pretty strenuous. E.g., do we want to support comparison?