Thanks all for the feedback, very encouraging.
Funny a few of you mentioned the adding traditional legend boxes for the coverage as this was what the General Manager also asked for boxes to be added which I was against, didn't think it was necessary?guess I was wrong.
To make these boxes I took a lower case i in the same font as the legend text and made curves and then deleted the dot and stretched the width. This meant the box was created with the same x-height as the font, means the boxes are different sizes but they fit with the text nicely I think?any objections?
As far as differentiating the coverage's more, as the map is trying to show how 'good' we are I don't think we want to visually emphasis the large area we don't yet have?personally I think subtle is good in this context. Also I think on the printed copy they are quite obvious, esp. now I've added the boxes. To the right to keep the %ages in line but if I remove these I think I will move the boxes to the left.
And I def see what you mean about the wording of the legend now - I don't think the percentages are even needed for the legend, think I will play with another text box like an advert saying how Terralink has 75% of the country covered and the remaining 25% under contract.
Does anyone else think the map really needs the urban areas shown in a legend? Personally I don't think it's necessary (but I didn't think legend boxes were either) as they are all major towns that every politician (intended audience) and most NZers would of heard of. Also even if not heard of I would think they were quite obvious even to the lay-person as being towns?
Thanks again, and now onto to the wording.