W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wsc-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: comments on use-cases

From: Maritza Johnson <maritzaj@cs.columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 09:04:58 -0400
To: W3 Work Group <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C049BC98-AC38-44B8-90BA-64AA6ACE3DAD@cs.columbia.edu>

Content looks good, just some small suggestions on wording.


1. Re-wording for 10.3

	Current: ... the resources to do "low fidelity" paper usability  
testing on a modest numbers volunteers (10-20) from WG member  
organizations.

	Suggested: ... the resources to do "lo-fi" prototyping for usability  
testing [Tiny Fingers]. Volunteer participants will be found through  
WG member organization.

	Reason: Lo-fi implies paper or some other sort of prototype that  
isn't completely functional. The second sentence -- Must we say how  
many people we'll run through? From a CHI point of view I prefer the  
suggested wording because it doesn't imply we'll intentionally  
recruit participants only from the WG organizations (which we should  
really try to avoid anyway,  internal testing tends to skew results).


Reference for "lo-fi prototyping" in 10.3:
	
Tiny Fingers
	Prototyping for tiny fingers; M. Rettig: Communications of the ACM ,  
April, Vol.37,No.4.; 1994.


2. +1 to Robert Y's suggestion to reword 2.2 but for a different reason

	Current: ... what security information a user requires to proceed  
safely ...
	Suggestion: ... what security information is relevant to the user  
accomplishing their current task (or achieving their current goals)  
safely ...
	
	Reason: Continuing with my argument from the f2f about the necessary  
security information being specific to both the current user and  
their current task, each of them "requires" different things, or may  
not require, but rather would prefer to know/see, or would like to  
know/see certain things. I don't _need_ to know the content on this  
page has not been modified, but I'd like to know that.


3. Typo in 10.3
Last paragraph, "usbility" (it's right in the middle of the  
paragraph,'find' will be better than trying to describe where it is :)




I'm happy with the wording in Section 10.1, after picking through it  
at the last F2F.


- Maritza Johnson

http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~maritzaj/
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2007 13:05:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 5 February 2008 03:52:46 GMT