Corrections

There are several typos, small errors, and inaccuracies in first edition of The Functional Art. I will list them here as soon as I find them. Please send me an e-mail if you spot one: alberto.cairo@gmail.com

• Page 2: The Malofiej organization has updated their website. It's www.malofiej21.com now (it used to be www.malofiej20 when The Functional Art was published.)
• Page 15: It's "Eric", not "Erich."
• Page 27: Figure 2.1. The graphic headline is missing. It should be "Defense in South America."
• Page 29: Each silhouette in the graph is equivalent to 10,000 soldiers (numbers are still in thousands.)
• Page 33: Lamarck lived between the "eighteenth and nineteenth" centuries, not between the "nineteenth and the twentieth". This is such a stupid one that I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote it, or how I missed it later. It's like saying that Lamarck lived after the guy who corrected him (Charles Darwin). As much as love Science Fiction, not even H.G. Wells would have passed that.
• Page 62: Nigel Holmes was the graphics director at Time magazine, not the art director.
• Page 71: Niels Bohr, not Niels "Böhr".
• Page 109: Figure 5.1. Caption. It should read "savanna", not "savannah", obviously (I love Georgia too much!). Also, it should be "feel", and not "fe;t".
• Page 111: At the end of the quote it should read "Chris Frith", not "Christ Firth".
• Page 113: Just to clarify: Both maps on Figure 6.3 use pictograms. The difference is that on the second one we help readers identify the two different kinds of phenomena by using color, and not just the shape of the pictograms.
• Page 132: Footnote 5, "Fron" should be "From."
• Page 212: www.malofiej20.com seems to have been hacked, or the domain expired and the SND-E folks forgot to renovate it. In any case, you can still visit http://snd-e.com/ to get information about Malofiej.
• Page 306: In the intro to the interview with Hans Rosling, "because" should be "became".
• Page 336: Figure 10.67. Caption. It should be "ratio", and not "ration."
• Page 341: "Blatantly" instead of "blantly."

Thanks to Robert Kosara, Nigel Holmes, Rich Beckman, Lynn Cherny, Naomi B. Robbins, Daniel Alonso, Ramon Bauer, Mike Hayden, René Clausen Nielsen, Arturo Fuentes, Ramiro Gómez, and Alexandru Agachi.

6 comments:

  1. A couple question about information in the book "The Funtional Art"
    pg XIX, Figure 3 "When Brazilian Economy Improves" – In the graphic sometime the first name is used for a president and sometime a last name is used, shouldn't this be consistent across the board or is there a reason, for instance the public knows the president by that name?

    Pg 42, Figure 2.12 "Market Capitalization" I found it a little confusing that the information went from right to left, especially the date. I understand the negative number flowing, but I changed it up reading left to right (2007 then 2009) with the "0" on the left side. Just wondering? Thanks for any response and by the way - Thanks Love the BOOK, had to put it down to go to work.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks so much for your comment. Ric. About your first question, in Brazil it is common to refer to a president using her/his first name ("Dilma", "Fernando Henrique"). Last names are also used, of course. That's not the standard in many other countries.

    Figure 2.12 is not a perfect graphic. Just a draft. In fact, after the book was published, I thought that other graphic forms may be more appropriate for these data. One alternative would be a slopegraph. Perhaps that'd be clearer (and would make the figures easier to compare).

    Glad that you like the book!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Page 109: further there is an 'space' between 'I' & 'f' in the word 'If' at the beginning of the sentence ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  4. page. 78: The infographic (figure 4.4) show the result of the 2010 White House election and the link leads you to the Senate result. The correct link should be: http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/results/house

    ReplyDelete
  5. p. 27. Figure 2.1. The defense budget for Bolivia is obviously wrong. It is listed here as $21.6 billion, which is equal to Brazil's. In Figure 2.3 it is given as $0.2 billion. This is case where if it had been graphically displayed decently in the first figure, it would have been obvious that the 21.6 figure was wrong!

    Also in middle graphic in Figure 2.3, Argentina's defense budget is given with a comma in place of decimal.

    ReplyDelete