a. Objective listing of the items
b. Inventory/Index
c. Wordy, visually complex to navigate
d. Precise

a. Belongings
b. Insulation and re-grouping of the elements
c. 6 images to look at
d. I makes the density very obvious

a. Chronology
b. circling elements with a different colour for each time frame
c. confusing
d. Ideally it could work with a system of roll over

a. Materials
b. System of patterning
c. the patterns don’t refer graphically to the materials (for example the pattern for linen doesn’t look like linen)
d. The different zones are clearly visible

a. Geographic origin of the items
b.Use of the official country codes determined by the International Organisation for Standardisation
c.No actual geographic visualization
d.Very clear and a touch a humor

a. Care instructions
b. Double-entry spreadsheet
c. Visually complex and doesn’t tell what is the meaning of each symbol
d.Allows a huge lot of information to be displayed at once

a. Frequency of use
b. Blanking of the elements and histogram
c.Doesn’t give a precise idea of the actual frequency
d. It would be interesting to repeat each item according to how often it’s worn.

a. The general colour palette of the wardrobe
b. The colours wear picked and ordered chromatically
c. It doesn’t give the proportion the presence of each colour. It could determine the width of each colour stripe
d. Works without words

a. What clothing is suitable to be worn for what weather
b.Weather forecast visual vocabulary
c. Doesn’t reflect the fact that things can’t be in different categories
d. Straight forward, words hardly needed + use of humor

a. Relation of what we wear to what transport we use
2. Pictograms used to answer yes or no to the question “is it suitable for cycling?”
3. Too many levels of information (3) and the Oyster Card logotype used as a pictogram might not be understood by non-Londoners
4. Humor