114

I can reach something like 114 controls from the driver's seat in my car.  Of course, like bibliographic records, there are lots of ways to count things, and this is a generous counting (e.g. the 4-way mirror control counted as 4), but even collapsing those, there are at least 50, and that doesn't count the on-screen controls of the navigation system, which would at least double the number.

What brought this to mind are some things I've read lately about  how simple OPACS should be  I'm all for simplicity and love being able to type almost anything into Google's search box and have it (usually) do something appropriate, but average people manage to cope with some fairly complex systems in their daily life, if they are important to them.  If complexity adds real functionality that many users need and they don't have to cope with it just to do common tasks, it probably deserves a place in our interfaces.

That said, 114 controls do stretch my ability to cope.

--Th

Comments

[Paul Miller]

"...but average people manage to cope with some fairly complex systems in their daily life, if they are important to them".

That's the important bit, isn't it? Our library systems simply aren't important to most people. They're necessary evils between the desire for a book and the book itself.

Also, most people don't 'drive' their library catalogue every day, so (as with e-Government systems) we almost have to consider every visit to be that of a 'new' user, rather than that of someone comfortable with our way of working.

[Thom]

Obviously our systems should be as easy to use as possible, but there are large numbers of people out there who spend quite a bit of time in our interfaces and we need to accommodate them in addition to the casual user. The easiest way to do this is with multiple interfaces (something my car doesn't have the luxury of). Maybe I'll do a post about variety.

--Th