> Please consider using the Persona terms for the above, as to not over > load the "user".
I know the term “Persona” in marketing. It is used for target market segmentation and product development. From how I have seen it used (at least in a Lean Startup context), is usually posed as a hypothesis against which the product is developed, and updated as the business gets feedback from the market. Personas are usually representative and quite abstract. Nobody really expects an actual person to exactly fit the persona, as it is just an approximation to help build the “right” product. I am not entirely sure that is what we are doing here. At least, that is not quite the same as what I was proposing. (But maybe it is something that we need to do?) I was thinking more about “roles” in the domain sense, which ought to be quite well defined since they are part of the James “contract”. We provide a list of requirements that the Operator must (implicitly) agree to, and set expectations as to who should be able to use the system. On our side, so long as the Operator respects this contract, we (the community) keep our end of the deal. Everybody happy. I’ll have to ponder this to see if there is any overlap. On the surface there are some similarities, but I get the impression that the objective is different. Cheers, =David
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
