(no title)
kahdojay | 5 years ago
We wanted to make a map that didn't feature large overlapping blood red circles everywhere and to give people a better sense of the geospatial data at a glance. We then wanted to show the curves at a more granular level, like the FT is doing so well now (https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest), so you can see an entity's curve by clicking on it's marker.
Would love to hear your feedback!
anonobviosly|5 years ago
2 concrete improvements would be 1) to change the color coding to cases per population (right now it seems to simply be a hard cutoff of 100 for orange, 1000 for red--which makes comparisons between unequal-sized geographies misleading), and 2) show a smoothed version of the curves (e.g an exponential moving average or somesuch) to handle noisiness in the day to day data.
But, yeah, much easier to read when it isn't overlapping blood red circles.
(Update: typo)
kahdojay|5 years ago
I do agree that it can be misleading to suggest that 1k cumulative deaths in somewhere like Michigan is the "same" (color-wise) as somewhere like Brazil and normalizing by population would address that. OTOH, I do think it's a valid use case to draw the attention to where the absolute death numbers are highest as well regardless of population at least based on our own curiosity, but perhaps that's more appropriately done in a simple ranking table.
We were actually thinking of repurposing the marker colors altogether to reflect on the "flatness" of a geography's death curve, but not sure if we want to trade off on quickly answering the question "who has it worse off, right now?"
Some things for us to consider, thanks again!
adamstep|5 years ago
bb2018|5 years ago
kahdojay|5 years ago
kahdojay|5 years ago