On 15.02.2008 17:23, Michael Barton wrote:
In theory, a usability study would be very helpful. But (big caveat), I worry about results from someone who doesn't understand GIS. This concern comes from several years of fielding well-meaning suggestions (often the same ones repeated) from newbys to GRASS about why don't we have x--when a GIS simply doesn't do x?
I believe we can maybe educate the would be usability student, just like in SoC. The student's in the SoC last year didn't have any background in GIS, and I think the results were very good despite that. I don't think that we should be so scared of ignorance that we would pass this opportunity, it is simply a matter of education.
GIS doesn't operate like a word processor or spreadsheet. So it's difficult to evaluate how useable a GIS is unless you know what a GIS is supposed to do.
Of course, but some things are universal, like when you do X you can expect Y. And re-use of UI elements like color selection. Also things like button placement and functionality can be maybe considered. I'm in no way a usability expert, not even close, but I've heard many comments about how hard GRASS is to use, and I think that with a good usability design we can maybe lower the learning curve a bit.
Within those parameters, I think a usability study is a good idea. I remember a year or so ago, a users made a very good suggestion that we not have menus more than 2 levels deep and that menu item names should be shorter. This was difficult to do, given GRASS's complexity. But having done it, I think it helped usability a lot.
Yes, I agree. It is a lot better, but I believe it could be made even better :)
--Wolf -- <:3 )---- Wolf Bergenheim ----( 8:> _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
