Fluid UX Walkthrough protocol - reorganized, looking for feedback.

[Jess Mitchell]

Paul,

My own preference would be to show *and* do.  In other words, we have  
the how-to-do-it plus the how-we-did-it.

I think we're headed there.  I'm copying in a thread that we had on  
the list a few weeks ago about this.  I think there was a 3-way  
suggestion.  How does that fit into what we're talking about here?

Best,
Jess

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jess Mitchell
Boston, MA, USA
Project Manager / Fluid Project
jess at jessmitchell.com
/ w / 617.326.7753  / c / 919.599.5378
jabber: jessmitchell at gmail.com
http://www.fluidproject.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




On Feb 20, 2009, at 6:24 PM, Paul Zablosky wrote:

> Hello Jonathan,
>   It could be confusing without some explanatory text.  I was  
> thinking that should we flesh out the top UX Walkthroughs page to  
> say "here are the techniques you have to choose from, depending on  
> your purpose"  -- a sort of Fluid-independent approach.  Then we  
> say, "and here's how the Fluid folks do it, it works really well,  
> and you might like to do it the same way".
> Whether we do this or not depends on our main objective for this  
> part of the handbook.  Do we want to present some general how-to-do- 
> it information, as well as how-we-did-it, or do we want to just  
> showcase the Fluid way?  I have to admit that at this point I'm not  
> sure which is better.  Originally, this material by Clayton,  
> Allison, and Daphne was aimed at "how to do it in the Fluid  
> project", and we have re-targeted somewhat for people outside of the  
> Fluid project.  When we started working on this a few weeks ago, I  
> thought the "give them a choice" approach was what we wanted -- even  
> though it's more work.  But we could go with the Fluid-only  
> approach, which your recent work largely fulfills.
> Jess, you have been taking the higher-level view of all this; what  
> is your take on it?
> Paul
>
> Jonathan Hung wrote:
>> I wonder if it will be confusing if we provide those individual
>> checklists in addition to our Fluid UX walkthrough? Perhaps we can
>> make those individual checklists as PDF attachments. We would then
>> communicate in the Fluid UX Walkthrough that they can optionally
>> perform the evaluations separately and link to the individual PDF
>> files.
>>
>> I added the procedure for selecting a Persona to the Preparation and
>> Execution page. I think that page will be very helpful when combined
>> with the Fluid UX Walkthrough document.
>>
>> Does anyone else have an opinion as to how we should present the  
>> Fluid
>> UX Walkthough, Heuristic Walkthrough, and the Cognitive Evaluation?
>>
>> - Jonathan.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Paul Zablosky  
>> <Paul.Zablosky at ubc.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jonathan,
>>>    Your "Fluid UX Walkthrough" page looks good.  I agree that  
>>> there's a lot
>>> of material, and it's a bit dense, but the idea was to capture the  
>>> Fluid
>>> approach all in one page, and I think you have done it.   The  
>>> question
>>> remains: are we going to provide pages on the individual  
>>> techniques as well
>>> as the bundled description?
>>>
>>> With our current page hierarchy, which looks something like this:
>>>
>>> User Experience Walkthroughs
>>>
>>> Fluid UX Walkthrough
>>> UX Walkthrough Preparation and Execution
>>> UX Walkthrough Protocols and Checklists
>>>
>>> Additional Questions for all reviewers
>>> UX Walkthrough - Heuristic Evaluation
>>> UX Walkthrough - Cognitive Walkthrough
>>> ... other current children
>>>
>>> we could enhance the top level page to give the user a choice --  
>>> they can
>>> either follow the Fluid way (with your new page), or they can just  
>>> select
>>> one or more of the techniques.  I'm not committed to one way or  
>>> the other --
>>> I'd like to hear what others think about this.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> Jonathan Hung wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As part of the effort to reorganize the UX Walkthrough protocol, I
>>> have made a draft revision of the UX Walkthrough Protocol and
>>> Checklist.
>>>
>>> Old version: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/x/VAEa
>>> New version: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/x/8QZa
>>>
>>> The new version attempts to deliver the following:
>>> 1. Convey the parallel nature of the Heuristic and Cognitive  
>>> evaluations.
>>> 2. Incorporate accessibility heuristic and cognitive evaluations.
>>> 3. Lay out the walkthrough in a more check-list manner.
>>>
>>> All the content from the old version is present in the new version,
>>> but with some modifications where necessary.
>>>
>>> My concern is that the new document is a bit dense, but I hope that,
>>> in context of being a checklist / reference for executing a UX
>>> evaluation, the content density would be okay.
>>>
>>> Do you think the new version of the walkthrough is more beneficial  
>>> to
>>> a would-be implementer compared to the old version? Are there areas
>>> for improvement? Any concerns?
>>>
>>> - Jonathan.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Jonathan Hung / jhung.utoronto at gmail.com
>>> Fluid Project - ATRC at University of Toronto
>>> Tel: (416) 946-3002
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://fluidproject.org/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20090220/7b75093f/attachment.html>