[Accessforall] "User preference key" instead of "User ID"

Gregg Vanderheiden gv at trace.wisc.edu
Fri Jul 6 15:54:38 UTC 2012


There are different sets of generic settings.

for online sets there could be 20 for low vision.

in a kiosk there might be only 10 tags for all disabilities -- and the tag would be labelled with names that make sense to the people in the kiosk perhaps - or to the person who does not know what they want.    For example someone who is older may not know they want high contrast or even what it is.  But if there are two tags for low vision they might try them both and see if one of them makes the phone easier to use.    THis all needs exploration -- but the idea is to discover   a) what the set of 'starter' configs might be and b) what to call them that will be most useful in that particular situation. 

RE terms to use -- we should do the same.      

Statement seems to be something quite definite rather than a set of options or variable values etc.   But I am open to anything.  I just think that profiles is increasingly looking like the wrong word.  


Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project
http://Raisingthefloor.org   ---   http://GPII.net








On Jul 6, 2012, at 2:44 PM, Treviranus, Jutta (Academic) wrote:

> This discussion of a generic set is straying a little too close to what people objected about profiling, e.g.,  "for people with low vision". I think whatever we call it we always want to state it as functional needs and preferences even when generic  "magnified, high contrast". People with low vision are not homogenous. There are many different functional strategies that apply. In WebForAll when we wanted to start generic we used larger categories for this interaction from the user's perspective, the utility  had the choice "Make it easier to see".
> 
> Regarding set vs. statement, I think we want to also communicate the concept that the user is in control or making the wish, stating their needs and preferences.  Set is technical and mathematical to me. I agree with Erlend that internationalization is important. I wonder whether there is another term we could use. 
> 
> BTW, my dictionary has the following definitions for Statement:
> state·ment   [steyt-muhnt]  noun
> 1.something stated- written words of something such as a fact, intention, or policy, or an instance of this
> • a statement of intent
> 2.a communication or declaration in speech or writing, setting forth facts, particulars, etc.
> 3.a single sentence or assertion: I agree with everything you said except for your last statement.
> 4.Commerce . an abstract of an account, as one rendered to show the balance due.
> 5.an appearance of a theme, subject, or motif within amusical composition.
> 
> Jutta
> 
> On 2012-07-06, at 1:46 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> 
>> How about we use the word  KEY and  SET
>> 
>> The KEY is what you pass up to the server so that it can figure out what preference SET to look up / use.
>> 
>> 
>> You can have many SETS that you might use.   One for when in private.  one while in public.  One that is Silent.
>> 
>> There can be keys to GENERIC SETS.
>> 		- for example - an older person doesn’t have a set of preferences yet and they go up to a kiosk to buy a phone.  The user says 'do you have one with large print".  The person at the phone kiosk (a little shop in the aisle of a big shopping market)   doesn’t really know what features there are or how to set them up.  But they do have a set of tags behind the counter and one says "for people low vision".   They touch it to the phone and it turns on all the low vision features.   If the phones have more than a simple set then there might be several "low vision 1" 2, 3 etc so the older person can try different sets easily. 
>> 
>> 		- another example -- a person is traveling and doesn’t want to expose their whole SET of preferences to this unknown machine (that might data mine them).  They only need basic setting on this ticket machine  so they use a GENERIC SET that matches them pretty well and they get it set up but leave only a Generic footprint behind.  (anything of course leaves some info -- but if they don't log in -- there is just a note that someone with that generic profile used that kiosk) .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Gregg
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>> Director Trace R&D Center
>> Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
>> and Biomedical Engineering
>> University of Wisconsin-Madison
>> 
>> Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International
>> and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project
>> http://Raisingthefloor.org   ---   http://GPII.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 6, 2012, at 12:52 AM, Andy Heath wrote:
>> 
>>> What is the relationship between the keys and sets of preferences ?
>>> Is it that one key can be associated with more than one set of preferences ?  Is one set of preferences associated with more than one key ?
>>> 
>>> andy
>>>> 
>>>> instead of saying "user is identified"
>>>> 
>>>> how about  we say "user’spreferencekeyis read (or obtained)"
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> In general
>>>> 
>>>> We talk about the user "identifying themselves"  and that info being
>>>> used to fetch their preferences all over the place as the first step
>>>> 
>>>> In fact they don't have to identify themselves - they just need to
>>>> provide a key that can be used to look up a set of preferences.  They
>>>> don't even have to be their preferences. they could be a generic preference.
>>>> 
>>>> This has privacy implications and implies that users identify themselves
>>>> in order to use GPII when they don't.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> OK to change our language?
>>>> 
>>>> Someone have a better phrase to use than     "User preference key"  ?
>>>> 
>>>> /Gregg/
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>>>> Director Trace R&D Center
>>>> Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
>>>> and Biomedical Engineering
>>>> University of Wisconsin-Madison
>>>> 
>>>> Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International
>>>> and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project
>>>> http://Raisingthefloor.org   --- http://GPII.net
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Accessforall mailing list
>>>> Accessforall at fluidproject.org
>>>> http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessforall
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> 
>>> andy
>>> -- 
>>> __________________
>>> Andy Heath
>>> http://axelafa.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accessforall mailing list
>> Accessforall at fluidproject.org
>> http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessforall
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/pipermail/accessforall/attachments/20120706/5acfea37/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 7318 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/pipermail/accessforall/attachments/20120706/5acfea37/attachment-0001.bin>


More information about the Accessforall mailing list