xml-dev - Re: Improved writing -- who's going to pay for it?

[James Robertson <jamesr@steptwo.com.au>]

At 18:29 13/10/2000, Rick JELLIFFE wrote:

>James Robertson wrote:
>
> > Is it therefore not sensible to do
> > "usability testing" (involving real users)
> > on documents?
>
>Yes.  However, I doubt if anyone will fund
>a comprehensive test program, pay for the
>statistically valid number of test subjects,
>write different versions of the manual to
>trial which is best, etc. and finish before
>December (to be in time for the REC),
>let alone in the next 2 weeks (to be in time
>for the CR.)

This is not the way it has to be.

Usability testing need not be a massive,
statistically-significant exercise. It does
not require a "control" group, etc.

Have a look at Jakob Nielsen's discussions
on "Usability testing on the cheap", and
"usability engineering".

The first suggests that even trialling
a document or design on 5 people can
catch many of the usability problems.

The latter encourages usability to be
considered throughout the design process.
In this way, a document can evolve
through a number of iterations (guided
by small tests), without the need for
a separate testing period.

Have a look at:

http://www.useit.com/

(And no, I don't think this can
be done in some virtual, mailing-list
fashion. It has to be done by the people
writing the document, face-to-face with
real users. Otherwise, all that we'll be
gathering is opinion.)

Just some thoughts,

J

-------------------------
James Robertson
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
Illumination: an out-of-the-box Intranet solution

http://www.steptwo.com.au/
jamesr@steptwo.com.au