<scribe> scribe: Rain

review card sort

Analysis: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bMtsy6ueSpPHlInNWTyTEM7eH1s9ssqXipTkr05ddRU/edit

Rain: question to group is whether or not we should narrow down to these four categories, and if so, are we happy with these
... and can we decide where these others go?

Lisa: could also be that we need to reword the patterns to make them more clear
... and categories that we made are an initial pass
... example "provide helpful technology and personalization"
... or other ways to make them more simple
... such as "use a clear and findable design"
... to help make things that aren't so obvious

Link to the analysis itself: https://app.optimalworkshop.com/optimalsort/s6hinqgg/0dho60a6/shared-results#/t/results/analysisTools/standardisationGrid

password: COGA

RRSAgent: make minutes

<julierawe> +1

Taking a look at the categories to see how we can refine them: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bMtsy6ueSpPHlInNWTyTEM7eH1s9ssqXipTkr05ddRU/edit#heading=h.ba28cs63kb7s

Lisa: would prefer to have personalization with helpful technology because personalization is technology, and support may not be
... support has a lot of crossover
... would like minimize distractions under clear design

Rain: feel that "support" and "cognitive load" are outcomes of all of them and don't belong in any one

Shawn: would like to make sure memory is included and is very important

Lisa and Shawn are discussing memory, wondering if we should map to functional needs instead?

<Zakim> ShawnT, you wanted to speak on functional needs

Rain wondering if we need to stop trying to categorize the patterns cleanly to one objective and instead look at tagging based on relevant functional needs

ShawnT: Rain's point related ... different functional needs intersect with each other. May be better to have the categories as tags and allow patterns to map to multiple

lisa: what trying to do with objectives is give people a starting point
... a simplified overview if you don't need all the patterns
... the getting started principles
... also in content usable have the user stories, and under each objective have user stories
... then have an appendix where mapping the story level to multiple patterns
... kind of when the direction with mapping already, so maybe could go in the functional needs user story direction
... did put it first before the design guide and did map to them
... and maybe functional needs is a different view of the document
... have done this with more outcomes and stories
... what is most helpful way to do this for our audience?

<ShawnT> can we give people multiple paths?

Rain: thinking that maybe we do both, keep the high level objectives for the top level summary, and then provide a different view into the design patterns that enable people to see the cross intersections

<kirkwood> sorry came in a little late, pls share w/ me too

Rain: to start a document to sort through what this means and share it with everyone for the Feb. 27th meeting for
... (in advance of that meeting)

<julierawe_> I won't be at this Monday's COGA meeting

Shawn volunteered to help mock up an html prototype for the new structure

Will do it on Github

<ShawnT> yes please

<kirkwood> yes

Rain confirming that everyone on this call would like to be participants in the document to asych try out this new structure

Lisa agreed verbally

Eric agreed verbally, too

And Julie

RRSAgent: make minutes

This is scribe.perl Revision VERSION of 2020-12-31
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: Lisa, Rachael, Becca_Monteleone, Jennie, JustineP, Kiki, julierawe, Rain, ShawnT, Jan, david-swallow, JohnRochford, EA, kirkwood, rashmi, abbey
Present: Lisa, Rachael, Becca_Monteleone, Jennie, JustineP, Kiki, julierawe, Rain, ShawnT, Jan, david-swallow, JohnRochford, EA, kirkwood, rashmi, abbey
Found Scribe: Rain
Inferring ScribeNick: Rain

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)