Future of Coding is an online community with a welcoming, cooperative, and revolutionary spirit. We are unified in the belief that the common practice of programming is tragically less humane than it could be.

Future of Coding

<https://twitter.com/prathyvsh/status/1162384931181305856>

It shows there is no universal representation that is more expressive than the others. Each one might be of interest depending on the idea you want to express.

There is a secondary interesting thing on this image (and it might not be the intention of the author). The representation of d, e and f in the indented list and the tree map, is not consistent. For the indented list there "must" be 3 bullets, and in the tree map the box "must" be arranged horizontally instead of vertically. I say "must" if one wants to stay consistent, but it can be a visualisation choice to do it that way to be more expressive (according you have "measured" it is actually more expressive).

I see that sort of presentational stuff as akin to the font that the text is rendered in, or the thickness of the lines. It will only be meaningful if the author and audience agree on the meaning. It's actually rather fun to enumerate all the attributes you can find that are superfluous to the intended meaning. If nothing else, it lets you find places that additional meaning could be attached.