[Sigia-l] The A>B, B>A problem

[Billie Mandel]

** For Your Eyes Only **

I've got a business processes example, since I have a similar problem to
Peter's. My project is an intranet for a large, dispersed nation-wide
nonprofit organization with a complex business model. Some users need to
access content by topic, across all regions, and some need
regionally-organized content. 

Unfortunately, the same user does not always need to slice it the same
way, depending on the project s/he is working on, so I can't go "user
profile-based" or "task-based". So both user approaches *are* equally
valid, but which one is or is not displayed for a given session presents
a findability problem. (A good Search does address findability, but I
don't think it's sufficient to rely on half the users to know to Search
rather than Browse, half the time.) 

For my site, a well-researched faceted taxonomy on the home page will
alleviate some of the pain, but like Peter, I do have a dependency on a
single tree structure - the structure of how the content is currently
organized on the system (and in the database). Until/unless I change the
back-end drastically, internal navigation and browsing is anchored to
the way things are currently set up, which is (loosely speaking) by
topic. I'm going to have to overlay any new navigation on top of this
structure without adding unnecessary complexity. Any brilliant
recommendations?

Re: what to call it/how to describe it succinctly: interesting as the
mathematical ideas are, I'm not sure they're the best for this
people-centered scenario. This problem only occurs contextually - within
a certain type of data set, only in the context of a certain kind of
conflicting users/usage profiles. So we could say that the problem
occurs when a data set has "multiple user-driven taxonomies/hierarchies"
- or something like that.  And I like Katherine's suggestion of
"reversible hierarchy," but we're not talking only about a
linear/reverse relationship, but also a reshuffling of components in a
different order.  Hmm.

- Billie



>>> Peter Van Dijck < peter at poorbuthappy.com > 11/5/2004 8:44:09 AM
>>>


> : Thanks, but no, facets are a way to *solve* the problem. When
you're
> : restricted to a simple hierarchy, the A>B,B>A problem exists. I'm
> : looking for a name for the problem.
> 
> Are these characteristics of division? Is the problem that of
deciding
> the primary characteristic of division?

If I understand you correctly then yes, the problem is deciding the 
*primary* characteristic of division.

The problem is this: Some users will want A>B ("I'm doing a French
theme 
soiree, so I want to see all French wines."). Others will want B>A
("I'm 
serving fish, so I want to see all white wines."). And it gets more 
complex with more levels, I just picked a simple example. As long as
you 
are restricted to using a simple tree to organize your stuff, there is

no easy way around it, and no best answer. You just have to choose, 
knowing some of your users will have problems.

P


------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

Searchable list archive: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/ 
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org 
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l