A graphical language for explaining, discussing, planning topic maps has come up before. But no proposal has ever caught on.
I encountered a paper today that describes how to author a notation language with a 300% increase in semantic transparency for novices and a reduction of interpretation errors by a factor of 5.
Interested?
Visual Notation Design 2.0: Designing UserComprehensible Diagramming Notations by Daniel L. Moody, Nicolas Genon, Patrick Heymans, Patrice Caire.
Designing notations that business stakeholders can understand is one of the most difficult practical problems and greatest research challenges in the IS field. The success of IS development depends critically on effective communication between developers and end users, yet empirical studies show that business stakeholders understand IS models very poorly. This paper proposes a radical new approach to designing diagramming notations that actively involves end users in the process. We use i*, one of the leading requirements engineering notations, to demonstrate the approach, but the same approach could be applied to any notation intended for communicating with non-experts. We present the results of 6 related empirical studies (4 experiments and 2 nonreactive studies) that conclusively show that novices consistently outperform experts in designing symbols that are comprehensible to novices. The differences are both statistically significant and practically meaningful, so have implications for IS theory and practice. Symbols designed by novices increased semantic transparency (their ability to be spontaneously interpreted by other novices) by almost 300% compared to the existing i* diagramming notation and reduced interpretation errors by a factor of 5. The results challenge the conventional wisdom about visual notation design, which has been accepted since the beginning of the IS field and is followed unquestioningly today by groups such as OMG: that it should be conducted by a small team of technical experts. Our research suggests that instead it should be conducted by large numbers of novices (members of the target audience). This approach is consistent with principles of Web 2.0, in that it harnesses the collective intelligence of end users and actively involves them as codevelopers (“prosumers”) in the notation design process rather than as passive consumers of the end product. The theoretical contribution of this paper is that it provides a way of empirically measuring the user comprehensibility of IS notations, which is quantitative and practical to apply. The practical contribution is that it describes (and empirically tests) a novel approach to developing user comprehensible IS notations, which is generalised and repeatable. We believe this approach has the potential to revolutionise the practice of IS diagramming notation design and change the way that groups like OMG operate in the future. It also has potential interdisciplinary implications, as diagramming notations are used in almost all disciplines.
This is a very exciting paper!
I thought the sliding scale from semantic transparency (mnemonic) to semantic opacity (conventional) to semantic perversity (false mnemonic) was particularly good.
Not to mention that their process is described in enough detail for others to use the same process.
For designing a Topic Map Graphical Language?
What about designing the next Topic Map Syntax?
We are going to be asking “novices” to author topic maps. Why not ask them to author the language?
And not just one language. A language for each major domain.
Talk about stealing the march on competing technologies!