Calendar

May 20

CTS 2013 - The 2013 Intl. Conf. on Collaboration Techn. and Systems

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 19

“ Design can be art. Design can be aesthetics. Design is so simple, that's why it is so complicated. ”

-- Paul Rand, 1997

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

David A. Schell

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by David A. Schell (bibliography)

2002

Edit | Del

Priestley, Michael and Schell, David A. (2002): Specialization in DITA: technology, process, & policy. In: ACM 20th International Conference on Computer Documentation 2002. pp. 164-176.

“DITA is an architecture for creating topic-oriented, information-typed content that can be reused and single-sourced in a variety of ways. It is also an architecture for creating new information types and describing new information domains, allowing groups to create very specific, targeted document type definitions using a process called specialization, while at the same time reusing common output transforms and design rules. Specialization provides a way to reconcile the needs for centralized control of major architecture and design with the needs for localized control of group-specific and content-specific guidelines and controls. Specialization allows multiple definitions of content and output to coexist, related through a hierarchy of information types and transforms. This hierarchy lets general transforms know how to deal with new, specific content, and it lets specialized transforms reuse logic from the general transforms. As a result, any content can be processed by any transform, as long as both content and transform are specialization-compliant and part of the same hierarchy. You get the benefit of specific solutions, but you also get the benefit of common standards and shared resources. For some groups, specialization requires a radical move away from centralized processes into a world of negotiated possibilities that introduces many new stakeholders to the information management infrastructure. For other groups, specialization introduces centralization, and, while it provides new opportunities for sharing and reusing logic and design, it also requires new policies and procedures to bring disparate design and development activities into a cohesive, coordinated framework. Previous papers ([1],[2],[3],[4]) have described in some detail how the technology of specialization works, and how it can be implemented using off-the-shelf tools that are dependent only on base levels of W3C standards (XML 1.0, XSLT 1.0). This paper provides a brief summary of recent changes to DITA specialization, and describes their effects on processes, but concentrates primarily on policy considerations involved in the deployment of a specialization architecture.”

1991

Edit | Del

Dumas, Joseph S., Schell, David A., Ramey, Judith and Wichansky, Anna (1991): Usability Testing: Where are We and Where are We Going?. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting 1991. pp. 266-267.

“Four years ago a group of usability test specialists held a panel discussion about this relatively new technique ("Usability testing in the real world," Mills, 1987, SIGCHI Bulletin, 43-46). One of the objectives of that panel was to expose professionals in the usability community to testing methods. That panel assumed that the topic of testing would be new to its audience. Since that time, the number of laboratories that conduct tests has exploded. While no one seems to know for sure, there appear to be in excess of 100 labs in the U.S. alone. Yet, there is no formal organization for people who do testing. This panel session focuses on the current status of testing and its future. The panel will assume that the audience is at least somewhat familiar with the principles of testing. The primary objective of the panel is to make the case that usability testing is a method that is evolving and changing. It is changing because product development processes are changing and because its strengths and weaknesses are more obvious now. The panel's second objective is to provoke a discussion about usability testing and testing methods. The panel will focus on several themes: * Usability tests are becoming less formal. The typical evolution of a human factors method is that it becomes more structured and formal over time. Usability testers, however, have had to adapt to changes in the product development process. More functions than ever are being implemented in software. More flexible software tools have made it possible to withhold freezing the components of user interface until very late in the design process. Consequently, conducting quick, informal tests is becoming more typical because the formal test to verify usability often comes too late to influence the product design. * Usability testing is moving beyond testing the user interface itself. With the introduction of object-oriented programming and contextual design there is more interest in understanding users' cognitive processes. There is also renewed interest in understanding how testing fits with other methods for improving usability. * Usability testing can improve managerial and organizational process. Usability tests reveal more than just flaws in product designs. They also can identify problems in the design process. When test results point to poor management practices and groups that are not cooperating, they can lead to changes in the way organizations develop products. Viewed from this perspective, a usability test has benefits beyond the improvements to the product being tested. It can be used to evaluate management practices in addition to competence in applying effective technical practices.”

Add publication