<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Quinn DuPont</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/3343</link>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:39:39 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Quinn DuPont</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Too many platitudes for a confused article.  I don&amp;#8217;t think that singling out &amp;#8220;context&amp;#8221; is the right way to understand IA.  In fact, I have a rather lengthly response that can be read in full at:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http://iqdupont.com/blog/?p=115" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://iqdupont.com/blog/?p=115&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;The spoiler of my comment is such: &lt;br /&gt;&amp;#8220;Taxonomies increase the available meaning by winnowing down semantic possibilities. A well articulated taxonomy will reduce the possible number of confusions (homonyms, alternative definitions, etc.) and thereby allow information to flow more easily. This is quite independent of context.&amp;#8221;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/deep-context#content_5420</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/deep-context#content_5420</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 03:39:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Quinn DuPont</author>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;The question that Tannen is ultimately posing is: &#8220;simple for whom?&#8221; Apple Inc. is often lauded as being makers of &#8220;simple&#8221; (and the cognate &#8220;elegant&#8221;) software and hardware. Yet, as any Mac fan knows, (at the best of times) the product is only simple from one perspective, typically the lowest common denominator. Crack open the Terminal in &lt;span class="caps"&gt;OS X&lt;/span&gt; and the experience becomes decidedly not simple, but that is the point. Power users need &#8220;advanced&#8221; features, and this requires a tradeoff of simplicity (although even here there are ways of improving the situation). This same problem occurs in the &lt;span class="caps"&gt;LIS&lt;/span&gt; world when journal database vendors offer a variety of search interfaces: simple, expert, advanced, etc. This is a design feature that is too infrequently implemented&#8212;its a sort of &#8220;mode switching&#8221;. Azureus, the Bittorrent client with its own problems (Java application? Ugh), effectively uses this principle of mode switching. I happen to be a &#8220;simple&#8221; Bittorrent user, since I mostly leach (and share), but I never create torrents or use special BT trackers. The interface is thus very simple. Mode switching like this should become common, since it doesn&#8217;t slow down any legitimate power users, but gets the newbies rolling quickly. There are also other ancillary benefits: segregating the processes can be more cost effective. For example, why have a $50,000/year &lt;span class="caps"&gt;ALA&lt;/span&gt;-accredited librarian standing behind the circulation desk? This is never done because the sorts of tasks that occur at the circulation desk can be easily handled by an $8.00/hour student. Its common sense, but when the design principle is kept in mind its effects are wide-ranging.  More is said here: &lt;a href="http://iqdupont.com/blog/?p=116" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://iqdupont.com/blog/?p=116&lt;/a&gt; .&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/simplicity-the#content_5473</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/simplicity-the#content_5473</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:15:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Quinn DuPont</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
