[Sigia-l] "General" as a category

[Dave Collins]

>In the testing, there were a couple of scenarios that needed
information 
from this category. To my surprise, all participants found it. At first 
I thought that it was because it was at the far right - they read all of

the other headings, didn't get a good feeling from them, so looked at 
the general category. However, on re-watching the sessions, I realised 
that something different happened. They didn't always read across the 
navigation, so this category wasn't always being checked as a last 
resort. Instead, it actually described what was beneath it quite well. 
All of the other categories had information that was quite specific. 
This one, however, contained information that was much broader, much 
more 'general' in nature. So it did describe the information better than

I had originally thought.



This gets at exactly my point. (I'm not refuting the empirical evidence
of your tests, I'm just not sure thev're gotten at *why* or *how* it's
working.)

Certainly, the *category* describes what's *in it* just fine. But for
users, that is missing the point. Their task is exactly opposite. They
know the *resource* they want, they just don't know *where* to find it.
What about 'resource Q' leads them to look in the General section for
it?