sounds like another theory to try to prove that blind people also have a
brain and can think just like their sighted counterparts can. Show the
monkey a rotten banana and a fresh banana and see if he is smart enough to
grab the fresh one and not the rotten one. Well I personally don't have
to see to be able to tell that something is rotten.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Pearson" <will@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Sonified Debugger vs. Screenreader Question
Hi,
Andy wrote:
"I think GOMS estimates are built on sighted folks
as well, so I have no idea how they apply to the blind community."
When I was considering using KLM-GOMS a few years ago my thoughts were to
use the operations that were applicable to blind users and to generate a
new set of operations and timings for operations that only blind people
perform. KLM-GOMS is based largely around physical tasks, such as
pressing a key, and I can't see this varying a lot between blind and
sighted computer users. The only reason why it might change is as a
result of differences in typing mode, e.g. touch typing vs hunt and peck,
but these differences can be found between sighted users as well.
I think GOMS is a pretty weak analysis technique. It has two significant
failings. Firstly, it views users as invarient and we all know that no
two people are not exactly alike. The second failing of GOMS, and its
most significant in my view, is that the technique only gives superficial
treatment to cognitive operations. Cognitive operations typically take
up more time and effort than physical tasks, something that is especially
true for novice users, and only providing for a simplistic model of
these, as GOMS does, doesn't really accurately model a system in my view.
Will __________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
