search

maryi / CSCW-Project

0 stars 0 forks source link

Descriptors in List of applications #37

Open maryi opened 8 years ago

maryi commented 8 years ago

Hey team, As i said in our last meeting i'm cheking that the descriptors we have in the report are the same as the ones in the list of applications. i found that some descriptors were using a slightly different voabulary so I just changed that (e.g. in service type, software download and should be free software download).

In other cases, I found descriptors that we had decided not to use with applications, such as the case as Phisical distribution -this one was replaced by AWARENESS MECHANISMS. In these cases, I just marked the header with red, so you guys know that we shouldn't be using that... If there is anything you think we SHOULD be using, please bring that up here for discussion.

Now, what is this issue for? I have two special cases:

  1. Scale: before it was as low, medium and high. In the report we said that the options should be 2, 3-5, 6-10, N ... so I changed those values. Before the change I made a copy of the original table, so if we want to go back to the previous version, we can do it. Do you agree with this change?? Please reply.
  2. Nascence: In the report we said the options should be Routine, Most of the tasks are routine, Most of the tasks will be new, Developing... but the table has values of low, medium and high. For this case, I propose to change the report and leave the values as they are in the table.. Do you agree with this change?? Please reply.
eli4 commented 8 years ago

both those changes sound fine to me

mpaskevi commented 8 years ago

Thanks @maryi

In the case of scale I am flexible. We could use the numbers to describe the low, medium and high range. So low (1-5), medium (6-10), large (10+) or something similar if its important to stay within the DB number descriptions.

For nascence I think its important to use the terms from the report (Routine tasks, Most tasks are routine, Most tasks will be new, Work is Developing) Since as we have discussed nascence is a problematic descriptor, I dont know if user could easily describe these in terms of low, medium, high. The notion of routine, most routine, most new, developing might make more sense IMO.

maryi commented 8 years ago

i see your point @mpaskevi .. and I think I agree with you. Nascence has not been an easy descriptor to work with, but if we leave it as low, medium and high we are leaving more space for ambiguity.

maryi commented 8 years ago

ok, updated List of applications for Nascence descriptor