On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 21:33, B.G. Sloan <bgsloan2_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the point of using silly examples. Doesn't
> it sort of weaken the argument?
No, just because they seem like silly examples, I've experienced them
first-hand. They *are* in fact silly! But they happen.
> For example, many people would dismiss the
> shelf/stack argument out of hand. Most librarians I know
> have the word "shelf" in their vocabulary, and many
> use "shelves" more than they do "stacks". To argue
> that "librarians miss out on perfectly good systems
> because they were looking for the word 'stacks'
> somewhere in the systems description" maybe shows
> a misunderstanding of librarians?
I hear you, but rest assured that an otherwise fine outside system was
rejected because it didn't have a call-slip module. Found out later
they called it "orders" and was open-source. Instead they got
"call-slips" and more vendor love-in. These stupid things happen.
And I'm not saying this to make anyone feel uneasy about this. But the
vocabulary and a certain kind of thinking gets in the way of progress
sometimes. And no, I'm not saying it happens all the time, but just
enough (and with enough consequences) to make me think you're all a
little bit crazy sometimes. :)
> I know it was intended to be a silly example, but it's sort of telling in a way.
Telling in the way that these things are so silly they really
shouldn't happen, I assume? :)
Alex
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
Received on Wed Sep 24 2008 - 14:10:30 EDT