- From: phoenixl <phoenixl@sonic.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:18:27 -0700
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi, Dan is very correct on this. It is hard even coming up with a good definition of usability that most people would accept. On a slide I use when lecturing I compare usability to beauty in the quote "I can't define 'beauty', but I know it when I see it." Scott > I think there are many threads here that are overlapping and may have little > to do with accessibility directly. I had the opportunity to go the ACM > Special Interest Group for Computer Human Interaction conference in > Minneapolis in April, and most of the sessions there were pulling on more > general parts of this set of questions. They were talking about usability, > of web pages, speech systems, wearable computers, of Open-source systems > like Linux and Mozilla, and not in terms of the blind or deaf or > cognitively-limited, but in general terms, often with very intelligent, > non-disabled individuals like the researchers themselves being the users. > SIG CHI is largely an academic group, with corporate research groups, > universities and the like, and the proceedings are peer-reviewed. But, on > the large topic of usability, all I could see was a lack of discipline. It > is an art form, making gurus out of Ben Schneiderman and Jakob Neilsen, > because, in my opinion, the science is still being developed. > > The one Interactive Poster titled "Usability Inspections by Groups of > Specialists: Perceived Agreement in Spite of Disparate Observations" was > very pertinent. In this study, Hertzum, Jacobsen and Molich (all from > Denmark) asked a group of usability specialists to evaluate a large web site > for ordering rental cars. The eleven professional usability specialists all > looked at the same site, and were all given the same five user tasks to > perform. But, they found totally separate usability problems. Of the 220 > unique problems, only a 9% overlap in problems found occurred between any > two evaluators. However, in a group discussion on the problems, the > evaluators generally thought they were all in agreement about the problems > in the web site. > > To me this means that usability is still not a disciplined science and what > is easy for one to use may not be easy of another. No wonder we are having > these discussions. > > Dan Nissen
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 22:19:04 UTC