On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Mikeal Rogers <mikeal.rog...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I would implore those doing this design work to offer greater weight to the > options of people who are *using* the language more than they are spending > their time on this list. > > Users are generally under-represented on standards, we're lucky enough to > have some here, I would take their feedback much more seriously than those > who spend the majority of their time designing languages. > +1 > -Mikeal > > On Oct 10, 2011, at October 10, 20115:25 AM, John J Barton wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Axel Rauschmayer <a...@rauschma.de>wrote: > >> *From: *Allen Wirfs-Brock <al...@wirfs-brock.com> >> >> >> +1 >> >> Bottom line, I disagree with John J's initial premise about the path we >> are on. I also am convinced that for all design choices we make(I'm not >> just talking about syntax here) there will be loud voices with objections. >> It is important that we listen to them. However, if community wide >> consensus determined from tweets, blog posts, and discussion list message is >> going to be necessary for every new feature to go forward then we might as >> well stop working on future ES revisions. >> >> >> Agreed. Statistically, for every 5% of people who make their voice heard, >> there are 95% that are keeping quiet. >> > > I hope you will reconsider. The 5% who speak up are exactly the people who > need to be convinced. They are the ones interested in this work; they are > the ones who can advocate for implementation, educate other developers, and > bring the new technology into full use. They are you users. The practical > way to understand what the 95% would say if you asked them is to listen to > the 5%. > > Listening is not seeking consensus. Listening is the best path to learning > how to communicate the ideas better. It is also the best path to realizing > that most JS developers have nothing like the amount of time you do to learn > to be effective with sophisticated abstractions. > > Expecting to base evaluation on some form of user testing as Allen proposes > is, in my experience completely hopeless. As Allen notes this kind of > feature requires in depth use. In this case that will be months not minutes. > Even then I'd be skeptical User testing results are almost always 'cooked', > arranged by the experimenter to create the result they seek. They do have > value, primarily because the process of creating the test and explaining to > the user flushes out a lot of bugs in ideas and their presentation. User > testing for certain kinds of user interface changes can be effective, but > its way out of its range here. > > jjb > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
