when you’re designing a site with many languages, how do you make sure the right user gets the right language? here are some thoughts from W3C
“The most successful sites are those that understand the experience range of their users. Some are veteran traders who know what to do, while others can’t tell a bid from an ask price. Accommodating the novice traders is crucial to success …”
eh. Another thing I can’t go to due to upcoming moving… but if you’re in Australia and you’re a web-person, and you like to ski (or you like schnapps) you should be going to this!
so, many thanks to Rachel, I’ve got my borrowed Wacom tablet all installed. Now I am spoiled for choice with ways that I can make my computer work – keyboard, trackpad, mouse, wacom/pen – it’s definitely overkill, but I love it!
I use a Wacom tablet as though I’m lefthanded at the moment – l’m trying to teach myself to use Denim, which I’ve mentioned before, as I think it might be a fun design/prototype tool.
It’s a whole new method of interaction and there is much to learn… as much as I’m trying to learn the software, I’m also trying to capture the experience of learning a new input method.
It’s only because I’m so committed to making Denim work that I’ve put in the effort to date. If I had less incentive I probably would have thrown the tablet away in disgust … I’ve been trying to apply the mental model of mouse usage to the pen – consequently all kinds of bizarre things happen as I’m compelled to hold the button down (thinking that it won’t do anything until I ‘activate it’.
Since then I’ve had a few ‘ah ha!’ moments as my brain *slowly* gets into tune with the pen and tablet model, and I’m almost able to make it do what I want it to now.
I’ll let you know how I get on with Denim soon!
Recently I suggested that starting a project with a content audit was not necessarily the best approach.
The overview of responses from the IA Institute probably give the best idea of current concensus:
The responses to this question gave a nice blend of ideas, mainly that the initial runthrough of the content at the start of a project can be thorough, but likely should not be the final, detailed audit.
Also, there is a desire to clarify the terms at work here. One person’s “content survey” is another’s “content inventory.” Or, one person’s “content inventory” is another’s “content audit.”
The responses to this question suggest the following continuum for the level of detail:
(Least detail) Content survey > content inventory > content audit (More detail)
I have to say – I think that there are plenty of projects where a content audit/inventory *is* probably a good place (or sometimes the ONLY place to start a project). The reason for my post was to make the point that this should become a de facto ‘standard’ approach to all IA projects.
As it happens (and possibly via karmatic consequences from posting what I did) I’ve had to do two content inventories since I wrote that post. In one project I did it because the client specifically requested one at the outset of the project, and in the second case it was because the content was so extensive and so poorly structured that there was no way to get a good idea of what content was involved by taking a top level survey.
I hope to not see an excel spreadsheet for at least a few weeks….
Image credit: WorkIsPlayIsWork @ Flickr
“Well, what is ethnography anyway? It sounds like such a cool word. When pitching the method to my clients, I describe ethnography as a fancy term for shadowing….”
still looking for a tool to replace visio… here’s a web-based app that looks kind of cool… via http://digital-web.com/news/2006/05/online_diagramming_with_gliffy/