Re: User testing for semantic applicatons

Thanks Emmanuelle

for understanding and supporting the point

I know that some  may not see  the need to comply with WCAG  for applications that are supposed to be used by machines, 
But these parsers and reasoners need to be written, developed, bought, designed, maintained, manged, budgeted for, operated by (intelligent?) humans (until we can replace those too) - these humans are likely to managing offline processes now, and I am not surprised the semantic web looks like its still distant to them - as well as to anyone else who is not writing semantic apps

 'Semantic usability testing' is currently being done by the same geeks
who develop the semantic things that nobody else can understand. A user group should be diverse
and respond to a plural list of user profiles, especially if they are technology savy in other areas of IT, and still cant make sense of the think, or must struggle too hard to work it out, or dont have that kind of time right now

I think there is scope for a web service to collect user feedback from all the semantic web applications and store it in an online repository for analysis and consideration and to help develop  a repository for training materials and usability guidelines for semantic web applications .Should not be difficult to do, Emmanuelle, let me know if you want to start working together on this idea, we can propose a workgroup (or start a user led protest)

Look forward to be testing intuitive semantic applications, at your convenience folks

Paola Di Maio (PDM)

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo 
  To: ; 'SW-forum Web' 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:27 PM
  Subject: RE: User testing for semantic applicatons

  Hi "PDM",

  I agree with you. There are a lot of work around the "semantic web" and maybe is a good work for the "machines". But I can't understand why the people working on it don't care about accessibility. The semantic web is nothing if can't be useful for the humans.

  Accessibility means usability for all. So, I think that complain with the WCAG must be *prerequisite* for each semantic web application.

  Best regards,
  Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo         Fundación Sidar
  Coordinadora del SIDAR        
  Tel.: +34 - 91 725 71 47             

    De: [] En nombre de
    Enviado el: miércoles, 07 de noviembre de 2007 11:40
    Para: SW-forum Web
    Asunto: User testing for semantic applicatons

    I must say something
    There are a lot of cool applications coming up, I try most of them , but they are new  
    I am not sure what to expect exactly. What should it do? How do I know if there is an error, or if this is really the way
    it should look? Little documentation, usability almost not taken into account etc.
    Also I dont have all day, just a few minutes, a few clicks, then I lose interest, must move on

    Now, the linked data below is quite straighforward intuitive interface (not bad in fact) although a few more explanations and how to's would be good. I also got an error when I tried it (different from the error below) not sure what to do next

    All this to suggest  a forum is created to handle usability of semantic applications, where we 'users' can
    report our experiences and get some help in running/understanding the stuffs. I have a lot of feedback and user tests already running on semantic applications, may be most productive if handled collectively and shared, rather than just sent to the developers who are likely not to understand my problem anyway (we seem to speak different languages)


      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Tim Berners-Lee 
      To: Hugh Glaser 
      Cc: Linking Open Data ; SW-forum Web ; Ian Millard 
      Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:15 AM
      Subject: Re: Linked Data available

      Umm ,,, in I get

      Request for under the hood
      Label Request for
      Status 200
      StatusText OK
      Accept-ranges bytes
      Connection close
      Content-length 2005
      Content type text/xml
      Date Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:27:37 GMT
      Etag "7785ba-7d5-43e4bd0f48e00"
      Last-modified Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:27:36 GMT
      Server Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat)
      Handler opt off 

      Something funny about the XML:  Line 2: doctype broken.  Shoud not be a doctype.

      <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
      <!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
              <!ENTITY rdf ''>
              <!ENTITY rdfs ''>
              <!ENTITY owl ''>
              <!ENTITY akt ''>
              <!ENTITY akts ''>
              <!ENTITY extn ''>
              <!ENTITY wiki ''>
              <!ENTITY resist ''>
              <!ENTITY resex ''>
              <!ENTITY courseware ''>
              <!ENTITY dc ''>
              <!ENTITY dct ''>
              <owl:Ontology rdf:about="">


Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2007 13:53:03 UTC