These discussions raise the general issue of what charts to use - for those who want charts - as a companion to any listings of doubles.
The most significant limitation for a book such as Haas's Double Stars for Small Telescopes, as it was for TW Webb's Celestial Objects for Common Telescopes in its numerous editions, was the need to supplement the book with a suitable star atlas. Haas leaves the reader to find their own preferred atlas or star maps. In the 19th century, the well known astronomy writer RA Proctor produced Atlases, and as Webb says "the smaller of these was especially intended as a companion to the present work..." [that is, the Celestial Objects...].
In the 6th edition of Celestial Objects, of 1917, which is long after Webb's death, TE Espin updating the work refers the reader to Cottam's 'Charts of the Constellations' [1889, 1891] which, again, were intended as companions to Webb.
In these later times Haas has not had the gift of an Atlas, intended as a companion for her book, to be produced. In some respects the CDSA 1st Edition was a reasonable fit for such an Atlas, even though designed as a standalone. I've used it as a companion to Haas, along with CDSA2.
Back in the 1990s, before these books were published, having compiled my own computer-aided lists, I spent some periods of observing using Sky Atlas 2000 along with Uranometria 2000. With a pair of 10x50 binoculars, a driven but not computer aided telescope (no go-to), I worked my way through many constellations by star hopping.
When I had access to quicker methods, such as the push-to system at the public observatory where I worked regular evenings for some years, I found that much preferable and much quicker. I could find the objects rapidly, and make observing notes of the double and its field, noting nearby other doubles, bright stars, clusters, etc. And describing in notes the changing appearance of the double as magnification increased. As I was no longer star-hopping with the push-to (by RA and Dec from my lists) I no longer used Sky Atlas 2000 for finding purposes, but having Uranometria with me enabled noticing other objects near the doubles I observed. I could offset to observe these.
These days, with go-to systems, I still make use of various atlases - CDSA 1 or 2 for area overview, sometimes Uranometria, and in the study Cartes du Ciel, with its ability to incorporate various catalogues and links to Simbad.
Uwe, following your note above, I had another look at the Interstellarum Atlas via the sample charts online. Much prettier than Uranometria with the added colour, and with a reasonable sub-set of double stars identified by their discoverer labels. But without the simple bar through the symbol that Uranometria used for all the many more doubles they included. I suspect that had I acquired and used Interstellarum in recent years I'd have been marking the unmarked doubles, as I observed them, with the simple bar or short line through the star symbol. Makes for easier finding later.
Interstellarum looks like a very good Atlas for general deep sky use. And I'd expect it to be particularly good for finding the marked doubles. I think it would be a good companion to books such as Haas's.