> the map is still useful for seeing the directional trend.
Isn't that also true of the original map, though?
It's not at all clear to me that your visualization is an improvement on the original. The center has moved from Scandinavia to Spain, and I can see why Scandinavia wasn't a great center, but I don't see why Spain is better. Meanwhile, your visualization depends on the projection used, which seems highly nonintuitive.
(If you go from the USA to China by the shortest distance, you go near the north pole. Calling the north pole the average of the two places may seem strange, but calling any other place the average is even stranger.)
Isn't that also true of the original map, though?
It's not at all clear to me that your visualization is an improvement on the original. The center has moved from Scandinavia to Spain, and I can see why Scandinavia wasn't a great center, but I don't see why Spain is better. Meanwhile, your visualization depends on the projection used, which seems highly nonintuitive.
(If you go from the USA to China by the shortest distance, you go near the north pole. Calling the north pole the average of the two places may seem strange, but calling any other place the average is even stranger.)