[I thought Brendan's comments might be interesting to the group,
since I'm sure his confusion will be shared by others.]
[For those of you on this list who didn't receive the original emails
on this thread, the context is that we're going to have a staff
presentation of user research the Design team has done on various
classification systems and organizational structures and how the
lessons learned from that research manifests itself in the Chandler
UI. Please scroll down to the last message for context and to find
links to the wiki pages.]
Brendan:
Thanks for the quick feedback Brendan. I've added some examples to
the Glossary page.
Do you feel like you're still feeling fuzzy about what a Faceted
system is? or just unsure about whether the iTunes is truly a faceted
system? The problem is that there are many different flavors of each
of these systems, so it's hard to pin down. In the most liberal
sense, iTunes is definitely a faceted system. Also, in the sense of
"the least wrong system", iTunes is definitely a faceted
system...'cause it's sure in hell not a hierarchy.
I've also responded to your comment on the 3rd wiki page.
On Jul 17, 2005, at 2:21 AM, Brendan O'Connor wrote:
Mimi: looks cool! I put in content-specific comments on parts 2
and 3.
here's one more thing that i figured would be better suited for to
email:
from the Preface glossary: I was initialy confused by "faceted
classification system". Maybe throw in an example: Album:, Artist:
mp3 metadata, itunes facet browser (right?? I've read all 3 parts
but am still not sure). You start using the terms a lot in the next
section before fully explaining what they are.
Brendan
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 23:26:41 -0700, Mimi Yin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Journal/
PrefaceToHierarchyPapers
http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Journal/HierarchyPaper
http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Journal/
HierarchyVersusFacetsVersusTags
Here are 3 more links in preparation for Tuesday's Virtuality
presentation. (The scrollbar in your browser will get very small
but, don't worry, it's mostly a lot of pictures** ;o)
It is in large part a continuation of the issues raised in the
Clay Shirky article, with a few twists and turns: http://
shirky.com/writings/ontology_overrated.html
I will be covering the material on the wiki pages lightly. Most of
the presentation will be focused on how all of this research
applies to the Chandler UI, so it would be best to familiarize
yourself with some of the concepts beforehand. Most of it should
be comfortably recognizable to people, though some of the examples
might be a little out there ;o)
The goal of the papers is really to "make concrete and explicit"
the sort of gut-level shared understanding we all have of the
Chandler data model and how it manifests itself in the UI.
The papers however, are still in the "1st drafts" stage, so
unfortunately you are all in some sense guinea pigs. Therefore, if
and when you come across something that just doesn't make any
sense, please feel free to share your feedback either directly to
me or in the form of comments on the page. This is exactly what I
need to improve these papers for more general consumption.
There is a high-level overview of the 2 hierarchy papers on the
Preface page.
The central question of Tuesday's presentation will be:
Hierarchies are good at telling stories, precisely because they're
so inflexible and immobile. Facets and Tags are great at being
flexible, but horrible at telling stories precisely because
they're so flexible and mobile.
How can we use the best parts of both systems in Chandler so that
we can have the proverbial cake and eat it too?
Thanks!
Mimi
**The wiki is horrible at formatting pages and due to the very
wide images on the page, I would recommend printing out a copy to
read the text and following along on the wiki when you need to
refer to images.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
