From liv at livlab.com Mon Jun 2 21:19:16 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 22:19:16 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usability interest group" Message-ID: <003e01c3296e$271ab930$0100a8c0@livlab> Rashmi & all, I didn't get a chance to read the emails about the IA Metrics project yet (sorry!), but I received the email below from Keith Instone through CHI-WEB and I thought it could be a good idea for AIfIA to participate through the IA Metrics group. I volunteered to participate individually, but I would rather do it through this group/AIfIA, because it I feel that we could have a nice resource for metrics from the usability world through this Usability Interest Group since many other groups will be participating. Just a thought for you to consider. Livia Labate _______________________________ liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Instone" To: Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 6:11 PM Subject: [CHI-WEB] Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usability interest group" Some members of the human-computer interaction community are trying to establish a way to help the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) address usability issues with the web. NIST hosted a workshop in conjunction with W3C to develop a plan for this. Read about the workshop here: http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/uig_w3c/ We are gathering data about who else is interested in participating in the proposed W3C Usability Interest Group. Please fill out this survey so that we can gauge the level of interest. 1. What company or institution do you work for? 2. Is this company or institution currently a member of W3C? (Check http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List if you are not sure) [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure 2a. If your company is a member, how confident are you that someone from your company would participate in a MEMBER-only W3C working group on usability? [ ] Very confident someone from my company would participate [ ] Confident that someone from my company would participate [ ] Not sure one way or the other [ ] Confident that no one from my company would participate [ ] Very confident that no one from my company would participate 2b. If you company is NOT a member of W3C, how confident are you that your company would consider membership if W3C started addressing usability issues? [ ] Very confident that my company would join [ ] Confident that my company would join [ ] Not sure one way or the other [ ] Confident that my company would NOT join [ ] Very confident that my company would NOT join FYI: Here is information on W3C membership - http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Prospectus/Joining - including the annual costs for full and affiliate members. 3. Whether your company or institution is a member of W3C or not, how interested are you in participating as an individual in a PUBLIC usability interested group? (This is what is currently proposed - any individual can participate.) [ ] Very interested [ ] Interested [ ] Not sure yet [ ] Probably not interested [ ] Not interested at all 4. OPTIONAL. Provide your contact information if you are interested in learning more about these activities. Name: Email: Please send your replies to me (not the list). A summary of the results will be shared with the list and used to help continue the push for the Usability Interest Group. Thanks in advance. -- keith at instone.org http://keith.instone.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------- Tip of the Day: Don't use automated replies to postings CHI-WEB: www.sigchi.org/web POSTINGS: mailto:chi-web at acm.org MODERATORS: mailto:chi-web-moderators at acm.org SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES & FAQ: www.sigchi.org/web/faq.html -------------------------------------------------------------- From zapolsja at WellsFargo.COM Mon Jun 2 21:26:31 2003 From: zapolsja at WellsFargo.COM (zapolsja at WellsFargo.COM) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 18:26:31 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usab ility interest group" Message-ID: Keith's a member of the AIfIA leadership council, so we should talk to him about getting AIfIA involved in this effort. -john > ---------- > From: Livia Labate > Sent: Monday, June 2, 2003 6:19 PM > To: aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org > Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C > usability interest group" > > Rashmi & all, > > I didn't get a chance to read the emails about the IA Metrics project yet > (sorry!), but I received the email below from Keith Instone through > CHI-WEB > and I thought it could be a good idea for AIfIA to participate through the > IA Metrics group. > > I volunteered to participate individually, but I would rather do it > through > this group/AIfIA, because it I feel that we could have a nice resource for > metrics from the usability world through this Usability Interest Group > since > many other groups will be participating. > > Just a thought for you to consider. > > Livia Labate > _______________________________ > liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Keith Instone" > To: > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 6:11 PM > Subject: [CHI-WEB] Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usability interest > group" > > > Some members of the human-computer interaction community are trying > to establish a way to help the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) > address usability issues with the web. > > NIST hosted a workshop in conjunction with W3C to develop a plan for this. > > Read about the workshop here: http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/uig_w3c/ > > We are gathering data about who else is interested in participating > in the proposed W3C Usability Interest Group. > > Please fill out this survey so that we can gauge the level of interest. > > > > 1. What company or institution do you work for? > > > 2. Is this company or institution currently a member of W3C? (Check > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List if you are not sure) > > [ ] Yes > [ ] No > [ ] Not sure > > 2a. If your company is a member, how confident are you that someone > from your company would participate in a MEMBER-only W3C working > group on usability? > > [ ] Very confident someone from my company would participate > [ ] Confident that someone from my company would participate > [ ] Not sure one way or the other > [ ] Confident that no one from my company would participate > [ ] Very confident that no one from my company would participate > > 2b. If you company is NOT a member of W3C, how confident are you that > your company would consider membership if W3C started addressing > usability issues? > > [ ] Very confident that my company would join > [ ] Confident that my company would join > [ ] Not sure one way or the other > [ ] Confident that my company would NOT join > [ ] Very confident that my company would NOT join > > FYI: Here is information on W3C membership - > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Prospectus/Joining - including the > annual costs for full and affiliate members. > > > 3. Whether your company or institution is a member of W3C or not, how > interested are you in participating as an individual in a PUBLIC > usability interested group? (This is what is currently proposed - any > individual can participate.) > > [ ] Very interested > [ ] Interested > [ ] Not sure yet > [ ] Probably not interested > [ ] Not interested at all > > > 4. OPTIONAL. Provide your contact information if you are interested > in learning more about these activities. > > Name: > Email: > > > > Please send your replies to me (not the list). A summary of the > results will be shared with the list and used to help continue the > push for the Usability Interest Group. > > Thanks in advance. > -- > keith at instone.org http://keith.instone.org/ > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Tip of the Day: Don't use automated replies to postings > CHI-WEB: www.sigchi.org/web POSTINGS: mailto:chi-web at acm.org > MODERATORS: mailto:chi-web-moderators at acm.org > SUBSCRIPTION CHANGES & FAQ: www.sigchi.org/web/faq.html > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Aifia-metrics mailing list > Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 3851 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/aifia-metrics/attachments/20030602/03ce32d7/attachment.bin From liv at livlab.com Mon Jun 2 22:51:49 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 23:51:49 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usability interest group" References: Message-ID: <02a801c3297b$158fd5d0$0100a8c0@livlab> Yup, I notified him that I would forward this to the metrics group. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 10:26 PM Subject: RE: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3C usability interest group" Keith's a member of the AIfIA leadership council, so we should talk to him about getting AIfIA involved in this effort. -john From liv at livlab.com Tue Jun 3 00:01:08 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 01:01:08 -0300 Subject: Fw: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3Cusability interest group" Message-ID: <002b01c32984$c46e2300$0100a8c0@livlab> Keith mentioned that they trying to get a handle on corporate interest first and professional societies like AIfIA afterwards when the whole idea is consolidated, but it's something to keep in mind. - Livia From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Tue Jun 3 00:43:10 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:43:10 -0700 Subject: Fw: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the "W3Cusability interest group" In-Reply-To: <002b01c32984$c46e2300$0100a8c0@livlab> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030602210023.019b5000@mail.rashmisinha.com> Hi everyone, Livia and John: once the W3C usability group figures out what their plan is, we should definitely explore the possibility of participating through this (IA-metrics) group. In the meantime, lets focus on figuring out the goals for this group. I just checked: this list has 18 members now. I am looking forward to hearing from you all about your goals in joining this list. What are the sort of issues related to IA and evaluation this group should focus on? What are the kind of frustrations regarding evaluation that you face in your own work? As I described in the introductory message, my own goals for this group are fairly narrow. The idea is to create some sort of a sharing mechanism and repository for evaluation materials. Next time, we need to evaluate our designs, lets use or adapt materials created by our colleagues that are available from this repository. Over a period of time, such sharing should lead to the emergence of some standards. Looking forward to hearing from you all. -Rashmi PS: Livia , I should point out that you did not miss much by not looking at the archives for the list :-) There was one introductory post (from me) before your post. At 01:01 AM 6/3/2003 -0300, Livia Labate wrote: >Keith mentioned that they trying to get a handle on corporate interest first >and professional societies like AIfIA afterwards when the whole idea is >consolidated, but it's something to keep in mind. > >- Livia > >_______________________________________________ >Aifia-metrics mailing list >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics From peter.boersma at ezgov.com Tue Jun 3 04:52:56 2003 From: peter.boersma at ezgov.com (Peter Boersma) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:52:56 +0200 Subject: Issues (WAS: RE: Fw: [Aifia-metrics] Fw: Survey: gauging interest in the"W3Cusability interest group") In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030602210023.019b5000@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: Rashmi asked: > I am looking forward to > hearing from you all about your goals in joining this list. What are the > sort of issues related to IA and evaluation this group should focus on? > What are the kind of frustrations regarding evaluation that you face in > your own work? The focus on a shared evaluation questionnaire (is that what you're aiming at?) seems too limited for me. Besides, there are other initiatives that cover this, including, IIRC, NIST's Common Industry Format (see: http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/iusr/index.html). I realize that "metrics" are often used as evaluation measures, but I'd like to see the scope widened to design measures as well. Or am I misinterpreting "metric"? Does that exclude guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's, etc.? Peter -- Peter Boersma, Senior Information Architect, EzGov "De Schinkel", Rijnsburgstraat 11, Amsterdam, 1059 AT, The Netherlands Phone: +31(0)20 7133881 / Fax: +31(0)20 7133799 / Mobile: +31(0)6 15072747 mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com / http://www.europe.ezgov.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Tue Jun 3 09:30:36 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 06:30:36 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Re: Issues In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030602210023.019b5000@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030603061331.019b9670@mail.rashmisinha.com> Peter, I would think design measures, rules-of-thumb etc. could be included as well. Though we should make sure to define the scope. And my aim is not for one shared evaluation measure (questionnaire). Rather there should be many that are useful for evaluating different kinds of systems, in different types of settings. So when I talk of standards, I am thinking of multiple standards rather than the "one standard". The reason for thinking of the project in a somewhat narrow manner is to keep the focus and make sure we achieve what we set out to do. At least, those were my thoughts when proposing this project. But this is the stage when we can revise or refine those project goals. NIST's (Common Industry Format) is about a common format for reporting usability studies. They do not talk about the method of evaluation. Its a great project though. And I have used their reporting format. -rashmi At 10:52 AM 6/3/2003 +0200, you wrote: >Rashmi asked: > > I am looking forward to > > hearing from you all about your goals in joining this list. What are the > > sort of issues related to IA and evaluation this group should focus on? > > What are the kind of frustrations regarding evaluation that you face in > > your own work? > >The focus on a shared evaluation questionnaire (is that what you're aiming >at?) seems too limited for me. Besides, there are other initiatives that >cover this, including, IIRC, NIST's Common Industry Format (see: >http://zing.ncsl.nist.gov/iusr/index.html). > >I realize that "metrics" are often used as evaluation measures, but I'd like >to see the scope widened to design measures as well. Or am I misinterpreting >"metric"? Does that exclude guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's, >etc.? > >Peter >-- >Peter Boersma, Senior Information Architect, EzGov >"De Schinkel", Rijnsburgstraat 11, Amsterdam, 1059 AT, The Netherlands >Phone: +31(0)20 7133881 / Fax: +31(0)20 7133799 / Mobile: +31(0)6 15072747 >mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com / http://www.europe.ezgov.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Fri Jun 6 12:43:08 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 09:43:08 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Scope of initiative In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030602210023.019b5000@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030606094119.024aa5e8@mail.rashmisinha.com> Hi everyone, Peter mentioned that he would like to see the scope widened to include guidelines, patterns etc. What would you like to see included? -Rashmi At 10:52 AM 6/3/2003 +0200, Peter Boersma wrote: >I realize that "metrics" are often used as evaluation measures, but I'd like >to see the scope widened to design measures as well. Or am I misinterpreting >"metric"? Does that exclude guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's, >etc.? > >Peter >-- >Peter Boersma, Senior Information Architect, EzGov >"De Schinkel", Rijnsburgstraat 11, Amsterdam, 1059 AT, The Netherlands >Phone: +31(0)20 7133881 / Fax: +31(0)20 7133799 / Mobile: +31(0)6 15072747 >mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com / http://www.europe.ezgov.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Thu Jun 12 12:48:20 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 09:48:20 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] common test scripting In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030603061331.019b9670@mail.rashmisinha.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030602210023.019b5000@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030612092502.02760630@mail.rashmisinha.com> The current SIGIA thread on "Questioning common test scripting: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/0306/0159.html raises some relevant issues for this group. Ash makes an important point that tests can have different goals (observe in natural settings, collect metrics, get users's subjective reactions), and the methodology depends on the goal. One method does not fit all goals. In some sense "usability testing" has become an umbrella term that encompasses different methods, and different goals, leading to some confusion. -rashmi From liv at livlab.com Tue Jun 17 23:22:17 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 00:22:17 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Collaboration, Communities & Competency: Achieving ROI through Best Practices Message-ID: <00ac01c33548$d2cf8a40$0100a8c0@livlab> Hello all, I thought you might be interested in joining this Web seminar tomorrow: Collaboration, Communities & Competency: Achieving ROI through Best Practices http://www.internetworld.com/webseminar/collaboration/#register Right From Your Desktop! Wednesday, June 18th, 2003 9:00am PDT / 12:00pm EDT Discussion Panel: John Zipperer, Executive Editor, Internet World David Armstrong, VP of Product Development, Autonomy, Inc. Daniel W. Rasmus, VP Collaboration and Knowledge Management, Giga Information Group Richard West, Head of Organizational and E-Learning, BAE Systems Sponsor: Autonomy, Inc. Requirements: Telephone and Web connection. Participants will listen to a panel discussion via telephone, while simultaneously viewing a corresponding presentation online. Participation in this seminar is FREE. Registrations are being accepted here on a first-come, first-served basis. You will receive participation instructions by email approximately one week prior to the seminar. Space is limited! Make your reservation today. Livia Labate _______________________________ liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Wed Jun 18 15:14:28 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 12:14:28 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <00ac01c33548$d2cf8a40$0100a8c0@livlab> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030618112541.02548198@mail.rashmisinha.com> Hi all, Lets try to think about the agenda for this group should be over the next few days. I had laid down a preliminary agenda in the first message to this group (look in the archives). What are your thoughts? Some questions questions that we need to think about. -What should be the scope of the group? -Should this be a top-down or bottom-up approach or a mix of the two. i.e., should we actually propose some standard methods and metrics, or simply create a community infrastructure for it to emerge (a place for sharing your own material and accessing other's shared materials). It would be nice to hear many perspectives on this issue before we move on to actually defining this group's agenda. Also, it would be nice to know who is part of this group. If you feel like it, then add a line of introduction with your message. To start it off: I am Rashmi Sinha, an independent consultant based in San Francisco. In a previous life I used to be an academician. You can find out everything you ever wanted to know about me (and more) at www.rashmisinha.com :-) cheers! -Rashmi Note. Since this is a working group with specific objectives, we need to give periodic (beginning of every month) updates to AIfIA regarding our progress. From liv at livlab.com Wed Jun 18 19:10:49 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 20:10:49 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030618112541.02548198@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <018201c335ee$dc445460$0100a8c0@livlab> Hi Rashmi and all, When I saw the invitation to participate in this group (on the AIfIA members list?), my first thought was "hummm I hope they plan on listing lots of the metrics used out there and gather resources for each, so we can make comparisons and suggest usage" So that idea kind of stuck with me. I personally would find great value in a 'resource centre' or something to learn about different metrics and their usage (benchmarking). And by metrics I am including guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's, not just evaluation metrics (Peter Boersma mentioned this in a previous message, I agree with this wider scope). As for the approach, I feel that we won't be able to propose anything (standard methods and metrics) until there is a real community infrastructure. It's hard enough to gather all the information, so thinking about propositions might be skipping too many steps. Then again, if that's is the *ultimate* goal of this group, excellent, we just need to remember it is a long term commitment because it won't be a short journey. One way we could do this is segmenting the scope and research slowly. Example: For the next three months we can look into gathering resources about types of project success measures (just a random example), then we can organize a discussion on the topic and finally compile a paper with the findings (?). Then move on to the next topic... OR trying to define what are the needs of IAs and IA projects and THEN explore the available metrics to verify if what is out there suits those needs and if not make propositions based on our findings. Just a few thoughts. Let's hear what everyone thinks. Following Rashmi's intro: I am Livia Labate, struggling, I mean, working as an IA in S?o Paulo, Brasil. Opposite to Rashmi I am an academician wanna be. My binary self can be found here: www.livlab.com :) - Liv From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Fri Jun 20 10:15:02 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 07:15:02 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <018201c335ee$dc445460$0100a8c0@livlab> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030618112541.02548198@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030620065628.02743e80@mail.rashmisinha.com> At 08:10 PM 6/18/2003 -0300, Livia Labate wrote: >I personally would find great value in a 'resource centre' or something to >learn about different metrics and their usage (benchmarking). And by metrics >I am including guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's, not just >evaluation metrics (Peter Boersma mentioned this in a previous message, I >agree with this wider scope). The wider scope does seem to make sense. >When I saw the invitation to participate in this group (on the AIfIA members >list?), my first thought was "hummm I hope they plan on listing lots of the >metrics used out there and gather resources for each, so we can make >comparisons and suggest usage" So that idea kind of stuck with me. I think its a crucial question as to whether the onus is on the group to go and decide what to list, or to create an infrastructure for allowing people to share material themselves. I think the latter approach might be more sustainable... Thoughts? -Rashmi From liv at livlab.com Fri Jun 20 17:45:12 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 18:45:12 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030618112541.02548198@mail.rashmisinha.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20030620065628.02743e80@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <018701c33775$3b49a7d0$0100a8c0@livlab> > Rashmi Sinha : I think its a crucial question as to whether the onus : is on the group to go and decide what to list, or to : create an infrastructure for allowing people to share : material themselves. I think the latter approach might : be more sustainable... I agree on the second possibility. It provides grounds for greater expansion and allows more people to get involved, not just those who have 'committed to the group. Livia Labate _______________________________ liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Fri Jun 20 17:46:25 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:46:25 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <018701c33775$3b49a7d0$0100a8c0@livlab> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030618112541.02548198@mail.rashmisinha.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20030620065628.02743e80@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030620144512.025794c8@mail.rashmisinha.com> At 06:45 PM 6/20/2003 -0300, Livia Labate wrote: > > Rashmi Sinha >: I think its a crucial question as to whether the onus >: is on the group to go and decide what to list, or to >: create an infrastructure for allowing people to share >: material themselves. I think the latter approach might >: be more sustainable... > >I agree on the second possibility. It provides grounds for greater expansion >and allows more people to get involved, not just those who have 'committed >to the group. Any other takes on this issue? -rashmi >Livia Labate >_______________________________ >liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com > >_______________________________________________ >Aifia-metrics mailing list >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics From SusanC at ZAAZ.com Fri Jun 20 18:49:19 2003 From: SusanC at ZAAZ.com (Susan Campbell) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 15:49:19 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group Message-ID: Hi, I share Liv's perspective that it's too soon for standards, and we can gain a lot learning from each other on what worked well and what failed. I prefer the bottom up method to get for sharing information, but top-down is useful when it comes to formatting all the ideas into a useful format (paper, best practices checklist, website, etc.) I'd also like to hear about the range of measures IAs need. These needs might naturally come out of method discussion. A bit on me... Susan Campbell...I lead Information Architecture and Usability Engineering at ZAAZ, a web agency in Seattle. Trying to balance work with outdoor sports so you probably won't reach me after hours ;) Glad to be involved and meet you all. Have a great weekend, Susan From peter.boersma at ezgov.com Mon Jun 23 03:34:11 2003 From: peter.boersma at ezgov.com (Peter Boersma) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 09:34:11 +0200 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030620065628.02743e80@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: Rashmi wrote: > [...] (Peter Boersma mentioned this in a previous message, I > >agree with this wider scope). > > The wider scope does seem to make sense. Thanks, that also informs my second answer: > I think its a crucial question as to whether the onus is on the group to go > and decide what to list, or to create an infrastructure for allowing people > to share material themselves. I think the latter approach might be more > sustainable... I agree. There is too little information to structure the material up-front. Peter -- Peter Boersma, Senior Information Architect, EzGov "De Schinkel", Rijnsburgstraat 11, Amsterdam, 1059 AT, The Netherlands Phone: +31(0)20 7133881 / Fax: +31(0)20 7133799 / Mobile: +31(0)6 15072747 mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com / http://www.europe.ezgov.com From rashmi at rashmisinha.com Fri Jun 27 14:32:43 2003 From: rashmi at rashmisinha.com (Rashmi Sinha) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:32:43 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20030627110619.01a750e0@mail.rashmisinha.com> Hi, Below I have summed up the jist of the comments on the agenda for the group: -Scope of initiative should be broad. Should include evaluation methods, metrics, guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's and don't. For every such contribution, it would be nice to know what worked and what did not. -Bottom up approach (letting people share methods and measures) is appropriate right now. For this some sort of a community infrastructure for sharing is needed. -Top down approach (standards etc.) are a worthy goal and worth aiming for. We do not know enough to push ahead with that currently. But its important to keep that in mind as we go on with the project. Can we go around and get some feedback, suggestions on this summary? Some quick ay's and nay's, suggestions, refinements would be great. Lets make sure to hear from everyone on the list before we forge ahead. cheers! -rashmi At 03:49 PM 6/20/2003 -0700, Susan Campbell wrote: >Hi, > >I share Liv's perspective that it's too soon for standards, and we can gain >a lot learning from each other on what worked well and what failed. I prefer >the bottom up method to get for sharing information, but top-down is useful >when it comes to formatting all the ideas into a useful format (paper, best >practices checklist, website, etc.) > >I'd also like to hear about the range of measures IAs need. These needs >might naturally come out of method discussion. > >A bit on me... >Susan Campbell...I lead Information Architecture and Usability Engineering >at ZAAZ, a web agency in Seattle. Trying to balance work with outdoor >sports so you probably won't reach me after hours ;) > >Glad to be involved and meet you all. > >Have a great weekend, >Susan >_______________________________________________ >Aifia-metrics mailing list >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics From Steve.Mulder at corp.terralycos.com Fri Jun 27 15:14:57 2003 From: Steve.Mulder at corp.terralycos.com (Steve.Mulder at corp.terralycos.com) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 15:14:57 -0400 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030627110619.01a750e0@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: Hi - A big thumbs up from me. I'm excited to see where this scope takes us. I'm also interested in what we define as IA metrics vs. broader user experience metrics. We (the User Experience Group at Terra Lycos) have been working recently on defining a set of broader metrics for our group to use on a regular basis. A familiar metric such as "Task completion rate" crosses so many disciplines; how (and why) do we try to define solely IA-related metrics? Steve Mulder Rashmi Sinha Sent by: aifia-metrics-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org 06/27/03 02:32 PM To: aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org cc: Subject: RE: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group Hi, Below I have summed up the jist of the comments on the agenda for the group: -Scope of initiative should be broad. Should include evaluation methods, metrics, guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's and don't. For every such contribution, it would be nice to know what worked and what did not. -Bottom up approach (letting people share methods and measures) is appropriate right now. For this some sort of a community infrastructure for sharing is needed. -Top down approach (standards etc.) are a worthy goal and worth aiming for. We do not know enough to push ahead with that currently. But its important to keep that in mind as we go on with the project. Can we go around and get some feedback, suggestions on this summary? Some quick ay's and nay's, suggestions, refinements would be great. Lets make sure to hear from everyone on the list before we forge ahead. cheers! -rashmi At 03:49 PM 6/20/2003 -0700, Susan Campbell wrote: >Hi, > >I share Liv's perspective that it's too soon for standards, and we can gain >a lot learning from each other on what worked well and what failed. I prefer >the bottom up method to get for sharing information, but top-down is useful >when it comes to formatting all the ideas into a useful format (paper, best >practices checklist, website, etc.) > >I'd also like to hear about the range of measures IAs need. These needs >might naturally come out of method discussion. > >A bit on me... >Susan Campbell...I lead Information Architecture and Usability Engineering >at ZAAZ, a web agency in Seattle. Trying to balance work with outdoor >sports so you probably won't reach me after hours ;) > >Glad to be involved and meet you all. > >Have a great weekend, >Susan >_______________________________________________ >Aifia-metrics mailing list >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics _______________________________________________ Aifia-metrics mailing list Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics From liv at livlab.com Fri Jun 27 17:12:47 2003 From: liv at livlab.com (Livia Labate) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 18:12:47 -0300 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group References: Message-ID: <003801c33cf0$dce6b2b0$0100a8c0@livlab> Thumbs up from me as well Rashmi. Re Steve's comments, I think that a great majority of these metrics will me multi-disciplinary (since that's the nature of our work). I might be easier to say what is NOT specifically related to IA than the opposite. But I don't think that's a problem. In fact, it reinforces the notion that IA is strictly linked to UX design and project planning/strategy. Livia Labate _______________________________ liv at livlab.com | www.livlab.com ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 4:14 PM Subject: RE: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group Hi - A big thumbs up from me. I'm excited to see where this scope takes us. I'm also interested in what we define as IA metrics vs. broader user experience metrics. We (the User Experience Group at Terra Lycos) have been working recently on defining a set of broader metrics for our group to use on a regular basis. A familiar metric such as "Task completion rate" crosses so many disciplines; how (and why) do we try to define solely IA-related metrics? Steve Mulder Rashmi Sinha Sent by: aifia-metrics-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org 06/27/03 02:32 PM To: aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org cc: Subject: RE: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group Hi, Below I have summed up the jist of the comments on the agenda for the group: -Scope of initiative should be broad. Should include evaluation methods, metrics, guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's and don't. For every such contribution, it would be nice to know what worked and what did not. -Bottom up approach (letting people share methods and measures) is appropriate right now. For this some sort of a community infrastructure for sharing is needed. -Top down approach (standards etc.) are a worthy goal and worth aiming for. We do not know enough to push ahead with that currently. But its important to keep that in mind as we go on with the project. Can we go around and get some feedback, suggestions on this summary? Some quick ay's and nay's, suggestions, refinements would be great. Lets make sure to hear from everyone on the list before we forge ahead. cheers! -rashmi At 03:49 PM 6/20/2003 -0700, Susan Campbell wrote: >Hi, > >I share Liv's perspective that it's too soon for standards, and we can gain >a lot learning from each other on what worked well and what failed. I prefer >the bottom up method to get for sharing information, but top-down is useful >when it comes to formatting all the ideas into a useful format (paper, best >practices checklist, website, etc.) > >I'd also like to hear about the range of measures IAs need. These needs >might naturally come out of method discussion. > >A bit on me... >Susan Campbell...I lead Information Architecture and Usability Engineering >at ZAAZ, a web agency in Seattle. Trying to balance work with outdoor >sports so you probably won't reach me after hours ;) > >Glad to be involved and meet you all. > >Have a great weekend, >Susan >_______________________________________________ >Aifia-metrics mailing list >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics _______________________________________________ Aifia-metrics mailing list Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics _______________________________________________ Aifia-metrics mailing list Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics From peter.boersma at ezgov.com Mon Jun 30 04:17:01 2003 From: peter.boersma at ezgov.com (Peter Boersma) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 10:17:01 +0200 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20030627110619.01a750e0@mail.rashmisinha.com> Message-ID: Rashmi wrote: > Below I have summed up the jist of the comments on the agenda for > the group: And I agree. Peter -- Peter Boersma, Senior Information Architect, EzGov "De Schinkel", Rijnsburgstraat 11, Amsterdam, 1059 AT, The Netherlands Phone: +31(0)20 7133881 / Fax: +31(0)20 7133799 / Mobile: +31(0)6 15072747 mailto:peter.boersma at ezgov.com / http://www.europe.ezgov.com From SusanC at ZAAZ.com Mon Jun 30 13:20:09 2003 From: SusanC at ZAAZ.com (Susan Campbell) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 10:20:09 -0700 Subject: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group Message-ID: Sounds good. I'm sure as we get into it, more refined direction will fall out naturally. Susan > -----Original Message----- > From: Rashmi Sinha [mailto:rashmi at rashmisinha.com] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:33 AM > To: aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org > Subject: RE: [Aifia-metrics] Agenda for the group > > > Hi, > > Below I have summed up the jist of the comments on the agenda > for the group: > > -Scope of initiative should be broad. Should include > evaluation methods, > metrics, guidelines, patterns, rules-of-thumb, do's and > don't. For every > such contribution, it would be nice to know what worked and > what did not. > > -Bottom up approach (letting people share methods and measures) is > appropriate right now. For this some sort of a community > infrastructure for > sharing is needed. > > -Top down approach (standards etc.) are a worthy goal and > worth aiming for. > We do not know enough to push ahead with that currently. But > its important > to keep that in mind as we go on with the project. > > Can we go around and get some feedback, suggestions on this > summary? Some > quick ay's and nay's, suggestions, refinements would be > great. Lets make > sure to hear from everyone on the list before we forge ahead. > > cheers! > > -rashmi > > > > At 03:49 PM 6/20/2003 -0700, Susan Campbell wrote: > >Hi, > > > >I share Liv's perspective that it's too soon for standards, > and we can gain > >a lot learning from each other on what worked well and what > failed. I prefer > >the bottom up method to get for sharing information, but > top-down is useful > >when it comes to formatting all the ideas into a useful > format (paper, best > >practices checklist, website, etc.) > > > >I'd also like to hear about the range of measures IAs need. > These needs > >might naturally come out of method discussion. > > > >A bit on me... > >Susan Campbell...I lead Information Architecture and > Usability Engineering > >at ZAAZ, a web agency in Seattle. Trying to balance work > with outdoor > >sports so you probably won't reach me after hours ;) > > > >Glad to be involved and meet you all. > > > >Have a great weekend, > >Susan > >_______________________________________________ > >Aifia-metrics mailing list > >Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org > >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics > > > _______________________________________________ > Aifia-metrics mailing list > Aifia-metrics at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics >