Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Dmitry Nekrasovski

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:52:23 GMT

The new design has some really nice ideas, but also many kinks that need to be worked out. I agree with previous comments with respect to toning down the icon colours, the lack of guidance on the function of the + and – buttons, and the distracting effect of the continually updated comment preview. Regarding the latter, the write-preview-post interaction sequence seems to work well for most CMS/blog systems, so I wonder about the design rationale for this approach. There also seem to be some issues with the search functionality. Search results pages are labeled “Browse stories”, and a search for “ia summit 2005” returns no relevant articles before the 10th (!) result – a bit ironic given our profession’s recent focus on findability.

Overall, my impression is that of a project still in beta, and I believe that it should be clearly indicated as such. This would ensure that readers are not left with the impression that IA’s fail to practice what they preach.

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:52:26 GMT

Looks great! I wonder about the placement of the Adsense ads in the article page though. I am sure I am not the only reader who finds the ads breaking up the article text annoying. Placing them beneath the full text of the article (https://www.google.com/support/adsense/bin/static.py?page=…) seems like a better alternative.

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:52:51 GMT

Interesting article. The HedgeStreet Trading Tool screenshot seems to be pointing to the wrong image.

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:35:14 GMT

This is one of the best articles I have read on B&A in a while. I have recently found myself in a “pioneering” role, and truly appreciate these succinct and actionable pointers from an author who obviously has deep first hand experience with the subject matter. Thanks Amy!

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 16:30:48 GMT

Nice summary of research on what is definitely an important topic for designers today.

The discussion of LinkedIn seems to be a bit off the mark though. The fact that LinkedIn does not distinguish between strong and weak ties is the rule, not the exception, as far as popular social networking applications go.

The claim that LinkedIn makes it difficult for you to connect with your weak ties is not factually correct, either. LinkedIn has provided the ability to connect to users with whom you don’t share connections for quite a while now (there’s even an option to indicate that you don’t know the person you’re inviting to connect!)

Nevertheless, a good read – I look forward to the rest of the series.

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:50:54 GMT

Nice article and series in general. Dashboard/portal design is definitely in need of a pattern language like the one you’re proposing.

The Geography Selector component, in my opinion, is more generically about parameterizing a Container with respect to some attribute, which doesn’t have to be geographical in nature. For example, I am currently working on e-commerce store management application where a similar component provides the ability to switch the language in which product data is displayed in the Container below.

Looking forward to Part 5!

Dmitry Nekrasovski — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:48:52 GMT

Great interview – looking forward to the book.

One issue I would have liked to see discussed in the interview is terminology. Indi’s use of the term “mental model”, as a set of behaviours and goals independent of a particular system, seems to be quite different from the traditional definition derived from cognitive psychology and popularized in HCI/UX by Don Norman et al. In a field that’s already plagued by a lack of consensus on matters of terminology, this double usage seems like a less than optimal solution.

Also, it’s not clear from the interview whether Indi’s mental models are intimately tied to the “fishbone diagram” visual representation. Presumably the same information can be visually represented in other ways (e.g. as an affinity diagram). If that’s the case, does it still qualify as a mental model?