1040Re: [agile-usability] Re: user centered design overlaps with traditional analysis?
- Feb 10, 2005It's funny that you mention those failure conditions. There is this product that automatically handes those failures. They call these failures exceptions. For design, you just have to worry about the happy paths. So far I'm really impressed by its simplicity.
From: "Jeff Patton" <jpatton@...>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:53:48
Subject: [agile-usability] Re: user centered design overlaps with traditional analysis?
I'm just catching up with this list [and the rest of my life for that
--- In email@example.com, Josh Seiden <joshseiden@y...>
> This team has been very detail oriented, so the specsThese are the failure conditions I hear Alistair Cockburn harp about
> represent a documentation of every possible thing that
> could ever happen. (What if a fire alarm sounds while
> the user is eating a low-fat tuna sandwich while
> entering this data? Is that different from the case in
> which the tuna sandwich is made with regular tuna
frequently... and he's winning me over. Doing design work often has
me focusing on the most probable "happy path" and paying a bit less
attention to failure conditions. Alistair asserts that use cases
force consideration of those failure conditions sooner. And,
supporting what he's saying I've seen lots of nasty stuff that causes
delays in development bubble out of the failure conditions. But,
often that nasty stuff only slightly affects UI design or user
Is it safe to assume that fire-alarm-with-low-fat-tuna-salad was a
failure condition on a use case? Did you have use cases to work
from, and did you find that the usecases documented basic user
interaction reasonably - in a way useful for your design work?
Yahoo! Groups Links
Sent wirelessly via BlackBerry from T-Mobile.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>