Towards standard methods and metrics for evaluating IA

[Rashmi Sinha <rashmi AT rashmisinha.com>]

>At 03:56 AM 7/2/2003 -0300, Livia Labate wrote:
> Providing explicit support for the best practice is often a the best way to
> make standards emerge, because it happens naturally (bottom-up approach). To
> "create" standards (top-down approach) implies that at some point you are
> going to need to enforce these standards -- which sound insanely difficult


This is a natural segway into a discussion of methods: of what is a good 
way to merge a top-down and bottom-up approach...

But before we get into a more detailed discussion of methods, I would like 
to ask once more those who have not spoken up yet to give us some 
indication of where they stand in regard to the agenda.

For quick review, below is what I had sent out a few days ago. I have added 
in specific suggestions and issues that have been raised as notes.

Please add anything other comments you have. Or just a quick ay or nay will 
do. This is a group project, and it would be nice to know what more members 
of the group think about the agenda before we move forward.

Please respond by the end of day tomorrow.
Thanks!
Rashmi


*******************************
-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.
(Note: Steve Mulder: Should the scope be IA or UX at large?)

-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.
(Christopher Gomez: We need to make sure that we are moving towards standards)
*******************************




At 03:56 AM 7/2/2003 -0300, Livia Labate wrote:
> > Rashmi Sinha said:
> "provide explicit support for
> standards to emerge, rather than create them."
>
> Providing explicit support for the best practice is often a the best way to
> make standards emerge, because it happens naturally (bottom-up approach). To
> "create" standards (top-down approach) implies that at some point you are
> going to need to enforce these standards -- which sound insanely difficult
> and not really productive considering just how flexible the work of an IA
> is. Works more like an imposition than an actual benefit.
>
> Note: The folks from the Translation Initiative
> <http://aifia.org/translations> are beginning to work on a project to get an
> understanding of the state of IA in the world through surveying. I told them
> to come here and discuss this with you guys, the metric experts :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Livia Labate
> _______________________________
> www.livlab.com <-- on vacations!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aifia-metrics mailing list
> Aifia-metrics AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/aifia-metrics