News and Reviews > Mini-Reviews by Members
Comparative Review of Writers' Tools (INITIAL DRAFT)
Dormouse:
I guess what people might actually need to do and what sort of data types they would need to capture etc., aren't necessarily a concern from your perspective as they would be from mine
...
* Collect/define User Requirements.-IainB (December 16, 2018, 04:09 PM)
--- End quote ---
It's not that they're not a concern, but simply that I believe that there is so much variability in need, and so many scenarios, that it's an impossible task. If you think it can be done, then it's well worth (you) having a go; I'm happy to add where I can.
An example of the variability is that my visual requirements have become an absolute requirement, but it's not the sort of thing that's likely to have been put on a list of needs for any generic group.
* Assess the likely effect of using the software in the key workflow processes-IainB (December 16, 2018, 04:09 PM)
--- End quote ---
I also agree the importance of this, but again writer workflows are just so variable - although no work flowing is quite common.
cranioscopical:
no work flowing is quite common
-Dormouse (December 16, 2018, 06:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
Time to take a turn around the block?
Dormouse:
no work flowing is quite common
-Dormouse (December 16, 2018, 06:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
Time to take a turn around the block?
-cranioscopical (December 16, 2018, 09:02 PM)
--- End quote ---
;D
IainB:
(a) On Collect/define User Requirements:
* It's not that they're not a concern, but simply that I believe that there is so much variability in need, and so many scenarios, that it's an impossible task.
(b) On Assess the likely effect of using the software in the key workflow processes:
* I also agree the importance of this, but again writer workflows are just so variable - although no work flowing is quite common.-Dormouse (December 16, 2018, 06:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
(a) Yes, that was kinda the realisation that I was pushing you towards, without wishing to put it to you in a negative way.
Your project scope would seem to be infeasible for that reason.
I would also suggest that there's no "believe" about it. From experience, a brief analysis of the candidate groups and likely business processes would indicate whether the combined task of analysing respective group workflows (processes) and making a URA to an adequate level of granularity for each group was feasible. You have an elephant there, and the optimal approach to analysis and study of it would have been to break it down group by group - which you are apparently not intending doing.
(b) Ditto - that was kinda the realisation that I was pushing you towards, without wishing to put it to you in a negative way, though "workflow" probably needs definition - e.g., (say) "a process that does XYZ and is at CMM Level 3 or higher would be feasible for URA."
Again, your project scope would seem to be infeasible for that reason.
Again, you have an elephant there, and the optimal approach to analysis and study of it would have been to break it down group by group - which you are apparently not intending doing.
On ergonomics (human visual perception), you write:
* An example of the variability is that my visual requirements have become an absolute requirement, but it's not the sort of thing that's likely to have been put on a list of needs for any generic group.I suspect that you couldn't be further from the truth. The study of the ergonomic needs of users of video screen output and who have vision/perception difficulties (visually impaired or of different visual ability) - and even for different psychological disorders - has identified/built a wealth of knowledge and understanding and user requirements standards relevant to the ergonomic needs of some generic groups. This knowledge is sometimes of crucial importance to the proper design efficiency and effectiveness of mission-critical systems in the fields of computer operations rooms, graphics design workstations, on-board military and aviation systems, military war-rooms and aviation control applications, for example, but since (I think) the days of CDC's Plato software it has also been applied with very good results to programmed learning systems, particularly children's (e.g., such as the one's my now 8 y/o son uses online through his primary school).
The trouble is that system developers who have not been involved in developing such systems have rarely received any training in the use of applied ergonomics in systems design, so most commercial software developers are relatively ignorant (don't have the foggiest idea) and thus oblivious to the wide potential need for such knowledge and feasibility of application of same.
Your response: "An example of the variability is that my visual requirements have become an absolute requirement, but it's not the sort of thing that's likely to have been put on a list of needs for any generic group."
- is thus a pretty typical mis-perception of this nature, probably largely due to the availability heuristic.
My ergonomic needs are usually uppermost (and that could probably be true for most users, were they but aware of it) and before I use/trial a new app. I invariably head for the options panel for application settings - for view/fonts/background colours, etc.
For example:
* -IainB (2011-10-08, 23:05:53)
* Refer also: Re: Improving the ergonomic readability on laptop screen displays - Tips and Tricks.
- uses workaround for CHS as an example.
-IainB (August 22, 2016, 06:10 AM)
--- End quote ---
Dormouse:
(a) Yes, that was kinda the realisation that I was pushing you towards, without wishing to put it to you in a negative way.
...
(b) Ditto - that was kinda the realisation that I was pushing you towards, without wishing to put it to you in a negative way, -IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
How very condescending of you.
Naturally I knew this at the beginning which is why I never attempted it.
Your project scope would seem to be infeasible for that reason.
...
the optimal approach to analysis and study of it would have been to break it down group by group - which you are apparently not intending doing.-IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
Of course, I'm not intending to do it - though I didn't want to stop you trying.
If I thought it would be productive I would have done it.
By the time you break it down to groups small enough to analyse, you end up with something that is useful to virtually no-one. That's fine for work you are commissioned to do, where the commissioners provide the boundaries, but not for something that might help an undefined writer casually browsing the net.
though "workflow" probably needs definition - e.g., (say) "a process that does XYZ and is at CMM Level 3 or higher would be feasible for URA."-IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
It's only an internet post, I thought normal English was more appropriate.
The study of the ergonomic needs of users of video screen output and who have vision/perception difficulties (visually impaired or of different visual ability) - and even for different psychological disorders - has identified/built a wealth of knowledge and understanding and user requirements standards relevant to the ergonomic needs of some generic groups. This knowledge is sometimes of crucial importance to the proper design efficiency and effectiveness of mission-critical systems in the fields of computer operations rooms, graphics design workstations, on-board military and aviation systems, military war-rooms and aviation control applications, for example, but since (I think) the days of CDC's Plato software it has also been applied with very good results to programmed learning systems, particularly children's (e.g., such as the one's my now 8 y/o son uses online through his primary school).
The trouble is that system developers who have not been involved in developing such systems have rarely received any training in the use of applied ergonomics in systems design, so most commercial software developers are relatively ignorant (don't have the foggiest idea) and thus oblivious to the wide potential need for such knowledge and feasibility of application of same.-IainB (December 17, 2018, 10:09 AM)
--- End quote ---
You might like to think that, but you are wrong.
Such 'knowledge' as has been acquired is limited and frequently hits exceptions in the real world.
The trigger for me in starting this review was the irritation from years of reading reviews evaluating software, usually only a few at a time, by comparing feature lists &etc, but never finding these reviews helpful for my own use. There were either assumptions about the type of writing being done, or about the writing workflow, and they never looked at alternative ways of achieving the same end or how they interacted with the parts of the workflow outwith the functions of the software being examined. I've tried to highlight some alternative approaches and writing roles that are usually ignored. But this makes it huge and, in my view, necessarily broadbrush.
I have a lot of experience of a wide range of writing roles, and a lot of knowledge about how different writers tackle their writing tasks; this review seemed a good way of leveraging it.
I suspect that you are not the target market.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version