W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-ui@w3.org > June 2006

RE: seedling topic list for SWUI06

From: Duane Degler <ddegler@ipgems.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:11:03 -0400
To: <public-semweb-ui@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20060607041110.A74513590AF@mail.itcinternet.net>

Lloyd, yet another interesting question:

"A naive question: how do you find unanticipated needs?
In larger interaction paradigm shifts, people don't know they need something
until they've been forced to become used to using it.  If SW does make new
types of previously unimagined interaction possible, what methodologies
apply to make sure they're useful before people get used to using them?"

Many layers to this... But I'll try to be brief! ;-)

Many needs are actually not unanticipated, just silently coped with...
Contextual inquiry and other observational methods are really valuable in
surfacing unconscious work-arounds to current barriers. Also, personal
experience plays a large part - many software giants came out of someone
frustrated by something that was hard, thinking about making it easier, and
they hack up a solution - resulting in a novel application.

There are also a number of products that monitor user interactions over
time, recording the data and producing pattern analysis of successful and
unsuccessful interactions. These are being adopted particularly by the
performance support and eLearning communities for providing "just in time"
support - could they be tuned to look for semantic footprints rather than
just transactional/data ones?

As you know, I am interested in your last point, to identify if some of the
traditional usability testing methods need to change in light of a more
semantic web. Even the simple technique of a developer showing something to
friends reveals feedback, and formal usability testing often produces
valuable insights. Interaction with vocabulary and controlled vocabulary has
been studied, but needs more attention, I expect. User testing and
longitudinal data from pilots help identify what is useful, but how we
establish the protocols and interpret the results may need to be revisited
as semantic applications become more personalized, adaptive, and possibly
agent-driven.

Duane
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-semweb-ui-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-semweb-ui-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lloyd Rutledge
> Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 4:13 PM
> To: public-semweb-ui@w3.org; Duane Degler
> Subject: Re: seedling topic list for SWUI06
> 
> 
> Duane Degler wrote:
> 
> > Tom and Lloyd,
> > 
> > Lloyd, I think that adopting Tom's suggestion of "personal/social" 
> > rather than "community" might be a more appropriate label - 
> this will 
> > umbrella other future issues like the interactions for agent 
> > empowerment/authority, transparency of social/legal rules being 
> > embodied into ontology/reasoning, and possible social interactions 
> > beyond what we generally now think of as
> > "(online) community."
> 
> You're right.  "Personal and social challenges" stands now as 
> broader than "community".
> 
> > Tom's point about tasks/goals speaks to one of my ongoing 
> challenge areas:
> > the *process* of developing semantic tools, data and 
> applications. I 
> > see a real lack of user-centered processes in SW 
> development. One of 
> > the things that user-centered design brings to the party is a 
> > framework for understanding user needs. This includes understanding 
> > users' (and in work settings, their organization's) 
> situation/context 
> > of use, goals, tasks, experience, attitudes, and desired 
> outcomes. I 
> > believe that it will be extremely important to apply UCD methods to 
> > achieve usable/successful outcomes. I also believe that the 
> > usability/HCI community is going to need to take a critical look at 
> > existing methods and how they will need to change to meet 
> the needs of 
> > SW design. It's all still a little early/formative - a 
> future challenge?
> 
> This is likely to be, rightly, a core discussion in this 
> field.  I addressed this just now in the topic list is to 
> change the last bullet in the bottom group:
> 
>      * the changed user experience
>            o new personas, tasks and goals
>            o new sitations, contexts and scenarios
>            o user-centered design and other methodologies for 
> designing SWUIs
> 
> In my last email I mentioned "horizontal" topics in my last 
> email, which apply to most or all the other topics.  These 
> are the methodologies topics.  So we're not just talking 
> about "tasks and goals" but "tasks in search" and "tasks in 
> browsing", etc.  The Semantic Web give a very flexible and 
> powerful way to represent and share knowledge, but making it 
> comprehensibly presented for any and all users is tough: it's 
> a mapping from how SW represents and processes to what a 
> human is likely to think, want and do.  As you indicate 
> below, we should focus here on what new UCD issues there are 
> for SW.  An interesting topic to explore.
> 
> > I also want to be sure we don't slip into a trap of becoming 
> > "information-seeking-centric" in our view of the SW. The IT 
> community 
> > focuses heavily on transactional applications and data 
> > exchange/interaction that all could (I believe) benefit 
> heavily from 
> > semantic enablement. If I were to go out today to design a 
> > claims-handling system for health insurance claims-handlers and the 
> > public, I would be looking closely at how we capture doctor/patient 
> > conversation, diagnosis, treatment progress, patient 
> awareness/choice 
> > of plan/coverage, patient awareness of medical issues, longitudinal 
> > outcomes, processing/eligibility rules, and claim-handler 
> > experience/needs (the list goes on...). We need to inter-weave 
> > informing and transaction semantically, and there are real 
> user interaction challenges in that arena.
> 
> We have room for those who build better interfaces for 
> finding information, even if for detailed, famaliar tasks, as 
> long as it's novel, and especially if it's uniquely enabled 
> by the Semantic Web.  But I agree that special value lies in 
> seeing how the large-scale interaction can change for the 
> better rather than simply facilitating existing detailed 
> tasks in large-scale interactions that stay the same.  Your 
> example above is important for showing how a large-scale 
> process is examined.  It shows determining genuine needs from 
> an existing situation.  A naive question: how do you find 
> unanticipated needs?
> In larger interaction paradigm shifts, people don't know they 
> need something until they've been forced to become used to 
> using it.  If SW does make new types of previously unimagined 
> interaction possible, what methodologies apply to make sure 
> they're useful before people get used to using them?
> 
> -Lloyd
> 
> > It is possible that there is nothing unique about the SW in 
> all of this...
> > But the conversation about challenges is very beneficial.
> > 
> > Duane
> >  
> > 
> > 
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: public-semweb-ui-request@w3.org 
> >>[mailto:public-semweb-ui-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lloyd Rutledge
> >>Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 8:38 AM
> >>To: public-semweb-ui@w3.org; T.Heath
> >>Subject: Re: seedling topic list for SWUI06
> >>
> >>
> >>Thanks Tom.  I've incorporated your comments in the workshop webpage
> >>(http://swui.semanticweb.org/swui06/) and in the SWUI SWUI.  
> >>Details inline.  Here's the changed part of the list:
> >>
> >># user as author
> >>     * publishing and sharing
> >>     * indentity
> >>     * approachable interfaces
> >># community dymanics
> >>     * trust
> >>     * privacy
> >>     * adoption
> >>
> >>SWUI SWUI entry points for the categories above are:
> >>
> >>http://aries.ins.cwi.nl/sesame/explorer/show.jsp?repository=sw
> >>ui&useLabels=yes&value=%3chttp%3a%2f%2fswui%2esemanticweb%2eor
> >>g%2fswui%23author%3e
> >>
> >>http://aries.ins.cwi.nl/sesame/explorer/show.jsp?repository=sw
> >>ui&useLabels=yes&value=%3chttp%3a%2f%2fswui%2esemanticweb%2eor
> >>g%2fswui%23community%3e
> >>
> >>T.Heath wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hi Lloyd, all,
> >>>
> >>>This is a really interesting list, and a great focal point for the 
> >>>SWUI community; very encouraging, thanks :) Taking you up on your 
> >>>offer, I'd like to offer a couple of comments/propose some
> >>
> >>changes in three areas:
> >>
> >>>1. Tasks/Goals -> Search/Browse
> >>>2. User as author: publishing/sharing 3. Personal/social 
> challenges 
> >>>brought about by Semantic Web
> >>>
> >>>1. Tasks/Goals -> Search/Browse
> >>>I believe the emphasis on search/browse in web usage
> >>
> >>obscures a real
> >>
> >>>understanding of the goal of the user. At the same time a
> >>
> >>semantic web
> >>
> >>>has the potential to deliver tools that truly support more varied 
> >>>tasks and activities online; the search engines and point-n-click 
> >>>hypertext of the conventional web are just one way of
> >>
> >>seeing the web. 
> >>
> >>>On that basis I think there'd be value in nesting Search 
> and Browse 
> >>>within a category related to Tasks/Activities in general
> >>
> >>and how the
> >>
> >>>user experience of these is changed by a semantic web.
> >>
> >>I think task and goals should perhaps become one of several 
> >>"horizontal"
> >>issues that apply to most topics.  The list has other 
> topics to which 
> >>changes tasks apply: to search, browse, publish, and others.  "New 
> >>paradigms"
> >>may apply across topics as well.  Perhaps "approachable" too. 
> >> I'll work on this.
> >>
> >>
> >>>2. User as author: publishing/sharing This deserves a 
> category of its 
> >>>own in my view, divorced
> >>
> >>from the all
> >>
> >>>but the last of its three subtopics ("approachable interfaces"). 
> >>>Perhaps nesting Publishing within a broader
> >>
> >>Tasks/Activities heading
> >>
> >>>might highlight some commonalities with a tasks/activities
> >>
> >>viewpoint.
> >>
> >>I agree.  User as author is a top category, with publishing and 
> >>sharing with in it.
> >>
> >>
> >>>3. Personal/social challenges brought about by Semantic Web The 
> >>>"trust" and "community dymanics" points currently under "user as 
> >>>author" have broader applicability in my opinion, and may 
> warrant a 
> >>>category of their own (perhaps something like "Personal/social 
> >>>challenges brought about by Semantic Web"). This would allow other 
> >>>related topics such as privacy and identity on the semantic
> >>
> >>web to be
> >>
> >>>encompassed. (aside: SW privacy was even discussed by BBC
> >>
> >>News after
> >>
> >>>WWW2006, so this issue will certainly be big in the public mind).
> >>
> >>"Community dynamics" is now a top category, with subcategories.
> >>
> >>Thanks again, Tom.
> >>
> >>-Lloyd
> >>
> >>
> >>>Naturally I'd be interested to hear what others think about these 
> >>>ideas
> >>>:)
> >>>
> >>>Best wishes,
> >>>
> >>>Tom.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2006 04:11:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:16:46 GMT