Hello, On Jun 6 12:57 Martin Schmidkunz wrote (shortened):
I was aware of the difference between syntax and semantics, I only doubt whether this difference is also clear to the user or to be more exact: at which experience level is the user able to distinguish between syntax and semantics?
There is no need that the user can distinguish. It is not my point that the user should be able to distinguish. My point is that - as far as I see - we focus currently too much on syntax-like stuff instead of focusing on the semantics (i.e. how to show the user the meaning behind the surface i.e. how to show the user "what is really interesting"). See what I wrote about light switches vs. fire alarm buttons: "the syntax it totally irrelevant here".
The point is that "what is interesting" is different for each user group. Maybe we should start thinking about different design for our different user groups?
No. "What is really interesting" is the same for all users because the semantics does not change. On a basic-settings dialog "what is interesting" is the same for experts and novices. On a sophisticated experts dialog "what is interesting" is also the same for experts and novices but novices may not understand it here and therefore it is an experts dialog.
I think the syntax vs. semantics discussion and your notion of the usability test showed also that we need to take care of the workflow to clean up the semantics side of life.
Perhaps I misunderstand you because I have no idea how the workflow could make the semantics clear? I mean "only the plain workflow" - not additional explanatory texts. Could you show for example how the workflow could make the different semantics clear in the previous password dialogs? Or how could the workflow make the different semantics clear when - the media size must be specified according to what there is actually loaded in the printer versus - an arbitrary printing resolution can be chosen?
when I talk about consistency I want to express that it is important that items that have the same semantics must look the same to avoid user confusion.
This is exactly the "consistency" which I would like to have. But what do I see currently? Items that have the same syntax look the same regardless of their semantics.
The light switches vs. fire alarm buttons is an excellent example. If you look closely at the fire alarms you will also notice that putting a red frame around the button is not sufficient to protect it from misuses: usually it is hidden behind glass and you have an additional explanation message. Which can be taken as a proof, that different semantics have to be explained to the user.
Not necessarily. According to Donald A. Norman, "when simple things need instructions, it is a certain sign of poor design". Perhaps he is wrong regarding computer software? If he was right, the password dialogs and media size versus resolution settings and light switches versus fire alarm buttons must be complicated things because they need instructions? By the way: The instructions on our fire alarm buttons are very clear. They command: "Scheibe einschlagen, Knopf tief drücken" ("break glass, press button") but I didn't do it up to now. Should I obey now? What happens if I refuse? If I obey, would I be liable for the broken glass? Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany AG Nuernberg, HRB 16746, GF: Markus Rex