Re: New issue: error recovery practices (Re: Proposed TAG Finding: Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use)

On Thu, 2002-05-30 at 07:47, Al Gilman wrote:
> The simplest way to derive 'don't recovery quitely' from the business
> notion of transparency is the following: to the extent that the
> automated processing [by the web insfrastructure as people go-between]
> departs from what the author expected, it should do so in a way that
> is clearly accountable to the user, the other stakeholder with
> standing in the transaction.  Don't make the transaction suddenly
> behave as though there is another stakeholder whose interests are 
> being pursued; show clear traceability to the interests of the 
> principals to the transaction.  Always interrupting the user on 
> fault-detection events is overkill; the users will reject this.  So we
> need a more indirect 'effective control' policy.  But it has to 
> satisfy this top-level transparency requirement; it has to work in a
> way such that the user is aware of the process and is convinced that 
> they are in command of it.  

Just as they are in command of what happens when they get a 404 message?

Users are a lot more resilient and generally smarter than software in
having flexible responses to errors.  They also learn better.  I don't
think users would reject being interrupted provided that it worked like
a 404 rather than a "I don't understand this script so I'll give you
half the page".

> It is the user that one appeals to because they are presumed to be 
> more immediately available.  In a real-time collaboration scenario, all 
> parties are available to exercise initiative in establishing a mutually 
> acceptable adjustment in the expected pattern of infrastructure 
> utilization.

And Web development is NOT  real-time collaboration.  If you can't be
bothered to test your pages before you present them to the users, you
deserve all the ire you get for interrupting them.  Vendors who produce
browsers which discourage such testing deserve equal and perhaps more
ire.

You business-vocabulary stories are far too rosy and generous for a Web
that often works - and works best - on a does this work/does this not
work/okay I'll go someplace else if it doesn't basis.

Helping people frequently means telling them no.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com

Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 09:16:54 UTC