🚀 go-pugleaf

I, too, don't have a real good definition of what this newgroup ought
to be though in my mind I saw it as discussing the ethics of various
decisions (design, perhaps, implementation, perhaps) as opposed to the
technical side as discussed in the *.risks newsgroup.  But I digress.

I share Larry's concern about designing a system for the basic
illiterate that can also accommodate someone with a tad more computer
dexterity.  Our products (library automations software) had to be
designed for the professor/scholar as well as the one-time library
user who needs a book on fixing his '57 Chevy and will never return to
the library again.

I have problems with icons ... I'm not sure why I feel that way,
except that the 'written word', ambiguous as it can be, is almost by
definition (my definition !!) LESS ambiguous than an icon.  In a user
population where skill can be anywhere from 0 to 100%, and
intelligence the same, it seems that icons have great potential for
confusing people.

I certainly don't have any answers...but then, isn't that what this
newsgroup is all about...?


-- 
Ted Koppel == CARL - Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries ==
    303-750-9142    !hao!isis!tkoppel     CompuServe: 71460,1572