Forms Talk

Ask Ms. GeekSpeak

By: Laurie Weaver
Member Columnist

Have you been trying to work with Information Technology, but your initiatives and patience grind to a screeching halt? Do the terms they use sound like so much gobbledygook? Do you ever get the sneaking feeling that IT professionals just may, in fact, have come from Mars? If so, you’ve probably run headlong into some common “GeekSpeak” roadblocks. The aim of this ongoing column is to help forms professionals and technology professionals overcome roadblocks by gaining mutual understanding, vocabulary, and context. So, if you need help with specifics, or if you’d just like to know more about a techie topic, email or post any and all questions to Ask Ms. GeekSpeak. On to this month’s topic: XML.

Dear Ms. GeekSpeak, Could you shed some light on what exactly is XML?

Sure! XML stands for EXtensible Markup Language. It is plain, vanilla text with a few conventions. It can be written with any word processor if you understand its syntax. XML is a way to put category labels around electronic data so it can be “parsed” by any system that is XML-aware. Parsed is just a fancy way of saying the system knows what to do with the data because it understands the XML tags (labels) around the data and its relationships. Why go with XML? Most systems that need data are XML-aware. Systems are usually part of, or attached to the “middleware” that moves data from one place to next. Here’s an example. An order is placed via e-form. The order data are parsed by a system that hooks into and checks the inventory database to ascertain sufficient stock. If sufficient stock exists, the system sends the parsed data on to the fulfillment center for shipping via its system. Hmm, still a little too Geeky?

Think of XML like setting up a file system. If you have files to place into folders, and folders to place into cabinets, you need to figure out what is related to what, and which method is best suited to sorting your files. Alphabetically? Historically? By business line? After you have decided on your filing scheme, you would then put labels on your folders and on your drawers so that you could place your files in the correct place in each cabinet according to the relationships in your filing scheme. In XML, we call this its schema.

Here’s an example of data, labels, and relationships: Let’s say BFMA wants to have a record of members’ names and email addresses.

<member>

            <name>

                        <first> Laurie</first>

                        <last> Weaver</last>

            </name>

            <email>LAWW@capgroup.com</email>

</member>

In the example above we have a schema in which the main category of data is the “member”. It is known as the root element. It is also the parent element of two child elements – one element for “name” and one for “email.” This schema further splits the “name” element into two more child elements: one element for “first” and one for “last.” Family relationships are used to describe data relationships in XML. The elements “first” and “last” are siblings (same level of hierarchy). The elements “name” and “email” are also siblings. The elements “first” and “last” are also children of “name.” The elements “first” and “last” are also grandchildren of “member.”

To further clarify, in the above example, the name data of this entry is Laurie Weaver. The data are not nested between arrow brackets<>, but are contained between <name></name> elements in brackets. That is how the parsing system knows the difference between what is data and what is the category of the data. What makes XML really powerful is that while the conventions used to mark up our data and indicate its categories are standard, what we name our element categories and the relationships we create are strictly up to us.

If this topic has sparked your interest, and you’d like to learn more, here’s a link to the W3 School’s free online XML tutorial and overview.

http://www.w3schools.com/xml/default.asp

Remember, post here, or email Ask Ms. GeekSpeak if you’d like more information about XML, or any other “geeky” word or topic.

Book Series Continues on User Interface Design

By: Margaret Tassin, CFSP, CDC
VP, Programs

BFMA is extremely fortunate to have a long-standing relationship with one of the most respected authorities on user interface design, Mr. Bill Galitz. He has recently published the third edition of "The Essential Guide to User Interface Design" (2007, Wiley Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, 857 pages.

Wilbert (Bill) O. Galitz is an internationally respected consultant, author, and instructor with a long and illustrious career in human factors and user-interface design. For many years he conducted a screen design course for BFMA. Click here for a complete biography.

The article below is the fourth in a series and is derived from the author’s most recent book, "The Essential Guide to User Interface Design".  You can order this book from BFMA.

Bill discusses website development and standards for seniors.

Website Use For Seniors

The invasiveness of the Web has greatly expanded the range of computer users. Computers are no longer the domains of the young and middle-aged only. Older people are now a significant force in Internet use and the Internet is quickly graying. AARP says that more than 40 million adults over 50 are online in the United States. The Center for Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School says that the percentage of Internet use by older users is:
• Age 45–55     86%
• Age 56–65     75%
• Age 66 +       41%

Age can have a profound effect on computer, system, and Web usage. Older people are all subject to the unavoidable physical degradations that occur in vision, hearing, cognitive processing, and manual dexterity.

Vision
The eye is a sense organ that begins to diminish in effectiveness at an early age, as anyone over 40 can attest. The eye begins its aging process in our early thirties, the amount of light able to pass through the retina beginning to lessen. At 40 the process accelerates, and by age 50 most people need 50 percent more light to read by than they did when they were in their twenties. Failing to be able to read a menu in a dimly lit restaurant is often the first time we become aware of this problem.

Also occurring is a reduced lens elasticity preventing focusing close to the eyes. The dreaded bifocal lens becomes a necessity. One’s field of vision is also reduced, constricting the edges of what can be seen, and reduced retinal efficiency occurs hindering adapting to glare and changing light conditions. As a result of these changes, older adults read prose text in smaller type fonts more slowly than younger adults (Charness and Dijkstra, 1999). To aid older users:
• For text to be read or scanned, use:
    • 12 to 14 point sans serif font (Helvetica, Arial).
    • Black text on a white background.
    • Left justification.
    • Increased spacing (leading) between lines.
    • Sentence style mixed-case letters rather than all capital letters.
    • Appropriate large headings in a 14 to 16 sans serif font.
• Use few colors, and avoid using blue and green tones.

Hearing
As people age, they require louder sounds to hear, a noticeable attribute in almost any everyday activity.  Hearing comfort levels, in decibels, for sounds at various age levels are (Cohen (1994):

Age      Sound level in dB         
25          57
45          65
65          74
85          85

To aid older users:
• Provide captions or transcripts of important audio content.
• Provide an option to display a visual cue for all audio alerts.
• Provide an option to adjust the volume.
• Use audio as an enhancing design characteristic.

Cognitive Processing
Brain processing also appears to slow with age. Working memory, attention capacity, and visual search appear to be degraded. Older users, a study found, had more problems with Web searches that required three or more mouse clicks, and they searched less efficiently than younger users, requiring 81% more moves (Mead et al., 1997). Memory limitations seemed to be the cause of most of these problems. Older people also had a harder time adjusting to computer jargon and recovering from errors (Dulude, 2002). To aid older users:
• Concentrate important information at the top of pages.
• Put most links in a bulleted, not tightly clustered, list.
• Provide a clear differentiation between visited and non-visited links.

Manual Dexterity
As people age, their manual dexterity diminishes. Typing and mouse movements become slower. The ability to operate some input devices decreases. A double-click on a mouse, for example, is increasingly more difficult to perform as dexterity declines. Morris and Brown (1994) also found, in a task requiring speaking into a computer, that older users had an average speaking rate 14% slower than younger users.  To aid older users:
• Provide large targets to make selection easier.
• To reduce the number of selections or clicks:
    • Do not require double-clicks.
    • Do not use pull-down menus.
    • Do not have a deep page hierarchy.
• Avoid the need to scroll to find information.

Applying these guidelines would also, of course, benefit all users of Websites. As always, usability testing should be performed to ensure an effective system for seniors.

References
Charness, N. and Dijkstra, K. (1999). “Age, luminance, and print legibility in homes, offices, and public places.” Human Factors, 41 (2)173–193.
Cohen, S. (1994). “Most comfortable listening level as a function of age,” Ergonomics, 37 (7)1269–1274.
Dulude, L. (2002). “Automated telephone answering systems and aging.” Behavior and Information Technology, 21 (3), 171-184.
Mead, S.E., Spaulding, R.A., Sit, B.M., and Walker, N. (1997). “Effects of age and training on World Wide Web navigation strategies.” Proceedings of the Human Factor and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting, 152–156.
Morris, R. J., and Brown, W. S. (1994), “Age-related differences in speech variability among women.” Journal of Communication Disorders. 17, 469.

Book Series Continues on User Interface Design

By:Margaret Tassin, CFSP, CDC
VP, Programs

BFMA is extremely fortunate to have a long-standing relationship with one of the most respected authorities on user interface design, Mr. Bill Galitz.  He has recently published the third edition of The Essential Guide to User Interface Design (2007, Wiley Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, 857 pages). 

Wilbert (Bill) O. Galitz is an internationally respected consultant, author, and instructor with a long and illustrious career in human factors and user-interface design. For many years he conducted a screen design course for BFMA.  Click here for a complete biography.

The article below is the third in a series and is derived from the author’s most recent book, The Essential Guide to User Interface Design.  You can order this book from BFMA.

Bill discusses performance load and its relationship to user interfaces.

Performance Load

As we all know through experience, the greater the effort required to do something, the less likely it will be accomplished successfully, or even done at all. The degree of effort that must be expended is commonly called performance load. It is also called the path of least resistance principle, or the principle of least effort. Performance load consists of two types: cognitive and kinematic.

Cognitive load is the amount of mental activity required to perform a task or achieve an objective. The implementation of the graphical user interface significantly reduced the cognitive load on computer users. One of its advantages is that it replaced commands that previously had to be recalled and formatted properly with commands in menus that simply had to be recognized and chosen.

Kinematic load is the degree of physical activity or effort necessary to perform a task or achieve an objective. The graphical user interface also reduced user effort by substituting a simple mouse click for a typed command consisting of several or more characters.

Cognitive load can be reduced by doing such things as:

Properly formatting and grouping information.

• Eliminating noise or unnecessary information on screens.
• Providing aids to allow the user to rely on powers of recognition, not recall.
• Automating tasks that require extensive memory.

Aids to reducing kinematic load include:

• Minimizing the number of steps to accomplish tasks.
• Minimizing control actions and movements.
• Automating repetitive tasks.

A person’s estimation of the degree of effort necessary to use a particular computer system, application, or Website need not be based upon extensive experience with each. A simple and brief introduction to a system can result in a judgment being quickly reached that the estimated effort to be expended is not worth the expected results. Rejection then occurs. Reducing performance load is a way to make systems more inviting to use.

Book Series Continues on User Interface Design

By:Margaret Tassin, CFSP, CDC
VP, Programs

BFMA is extremely fortunate to have a long-standing relationship with one of the most respected authorities on user interface design, Mr. Bill Galitz.  He has recently published the third edition of The Essential Guide to User Interface Design (2007, Wiley Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, 857 pages). 

Wilbert (Bill) O. Galitz is an internationally respected consultant, author, and instructor with a long and illustrious career in human factors and user-interface design. For many years he conducted a screen design course for BFMA.  Click here for a complete biography.

The article below is the second in a series and is derived from the author’s most recent book, The Essential Guide to User Interface Design.  You can order this book from BFMA.

Bill discusses human memory and how we must consider the inefficient nature of human memory when we design.

Minimize the Need for a Mighty Memory

Memory is not the most stable of human attributes, as anyone who has forgotten why they walked into a room, or forgotten a very important birthday, can attest. Today, memory is viewed as consisting of two components: long-term and short-term (or working) memory. This has not always been the case. In the 1950s most researchers believed there was only one memory system; the short-term component was not recognized or accepted. It was in this era that the classic memory study was published (Miller, 1956) indicating that memory limit is 7 ± 2 “chunks” of information. Shortly after this the concept of a short-term memory was identified, and in the 1970s the view of short-term memory was broadened and called “working memory.”

Short-term memory, or working memory, receives information from either the senses or long-term memory, but usually cannot receive both at once because the senses are processed separately. Within short-term memory a limited amount of information processing takes place. Information stored within it is variously thought to last from 5 to 30 seconds, with the lower number being the most reasonable speculation. Based upon research over the years, estimates of working memory storage capacity has gradually been lowered from Miller’s 7 ± 2 items to a size of 3 to 4 items today (Koyani et al., 2004). Keep in mind also that as people age, their working memory capacity does diminish (Laguna and Babcock, 2000).

Knowledge, experience, and familiarity govern the size and complexity of the information that can be remembered. To illustrate, most native English-speaking people would find remembering English words much easier than remembering an equal number of words in Russian. For a Russian-speaking person the opposite would be true. Short-term memory is easily overloaded. It is highly susceptible to the interference of such distracting tasks as thinking, reciting, or listening, which are constantly erasing and overwriting it. Remembering a telephone number long enough to complete the dialing operation taxes the memory of many people.

In performance, research indicates that a greater working memory is positively related to increased reading comprehension, drawing inferences from text, reasoning skill, and learning technical information (Baddeley, 1992). Research indicates, as well, that when performing complex tasks, working memory can be increased through applying two senses, vision and audition, rather than one (Williams, 1998). Research also indicates that performance can be degraded when a person must attend to multiple information sources, and then must integrate the information before understanding occurs. Mayes et al. (2000), for example, found that reading speed is degraded when working memory is also being used.

Long-term memory contains the knowledge we possess. Information received in short-term memory is transferred to it and encoded within it, a process we call learning. It is a complex process requiring some effort on our part. The learning process is improved if the information being transferred from short-term memory has structure and is meaningful and familiar. Learning is also improved through repetition and deep analysis. Thinking hard about information improves recall of the same information (Lidwell et al., 2003). 

Unlike short-term memory with its distinct limitations, long-term memory capacity is thought to be unlimited. An important memory consideration, with significant implications for interface design, is the difference in ability to recognize or recall words. The human active vocabulary (words that can be recalled) typically ranges between 2,000 and 3,000 words. Passive vocabulary (words that can be recognized) typically numbers about 100,000. Recognition tasks provide memory cues that aid searching through long-term memory. Our power of recognition, therefore, is much greater than our power of recall, and this phenomenon should be utilized in design.

Ways to reduce user memory loads, reduce the need for mental integration, aid recall, and expand working memory, thus enhancing system usability include the following:

• Present, whenever possible, lists of alternatives to remind people of the choices they have.
• Present information in an organized, structured, familiar, and meaningful way.
• Give the user control over the pace of information presentation.
• Place all required information for task performance in close physical proximity.
• Place important items at the beginning or end of listing, not in the middle.
• Place information that must be compared in close proximity.
• Do not require people to perform other tasks using working memory if screen-reading speed is important.
• Make important items unique or distinctive in some manner.
• Highlighting key elements is one way to do this.

References

Baddeley, A. (1992). “Working memory.” Science, 255, 556–559.

Laguna, K. D., and Babcock, R. L. (2000). “Computer testing of memory across the adult life span.” Experimental Aging Research. 16, 229-243.

Lidwell, W., Holden, K. and Butler, J. (2003). Universal Principles of Design, Gloucester. MA, Rockport Publishers.

Mayes, D. K., Sims, V. K. and Koonce, J. M., (2000). “Cognitive aspects of reading information from Video display Terminals.” Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 Congress, 1-294.

Miller, G.A. (1956). “The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capability for processing information.” Psychological Science. 63: 87–97.

Williams, J.R. (1998). “Guidelines for the Use of Multimedia in Instruction.” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, 1447–1451.

Book Series Begins on User Interface Design

BFMA is extremely fortunate to have a long-standing relationship with one of the most respected authorities on user interface design, Mr. Bill Galitz.  He has recently published the third edition of The Essential Guide to User Interface Design (2007, Wiley Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, 857 pages). 

Wilbert (Bill) O. Galitz is an internationally respected consultant, author, and instructor with a long and illustrious career in human factors and user-interface design. For many years he conducted a screen design course for BFMA.  Click here for a complete biography.

The article below is the first in a series and is derived from the author’s most recent book, The Essential Guide to User Interface Design.  You can order this book from BFMA.

Fitts’ Law

A common activity in screen or Web page design involves moving a pointer over the screen (using a device such as a mouse or trackball), positioning the pointer over an object or button, and then making a selection to implement the action or the choice presented. A common failing of many screens is inadequately sized buttons for easy human selection. I have seen many pages with buttons scarcely larger than the letter "o" in this article. (In spite of sufficient available space on the page.)

In 1954 a researcher named Paul Fitts studied the relationship between speed of human motor movements and the size and distance of an intended target. The results of this study have since been referred as Fitts’ Law.

Fitts’ Law states that the time to acquire a target is a function of the distance to and size of the target. This simply means that the bigger the target is, or the closer the target is, the faster it will be reached. The implications in design are as follows:

Provide large buttons or objects for important functions. Big buttons are better than small buttons. They provide a larger target for the user to access with the screen pointer. Large buttons reduce the need for very precise hand positioning movements.

Locate buttons or objects in the logical sequence of user activities whenever possible. Buttons positioned in the logical sequence of events always result in shorter pointer movements

Take advantage of the "pinning" actions of the sides, top, bottom, and corners of the screen. Create toolbar icons that "bleed" into the edges of a display, rather than those that leave a one-pixel, nonclickable edge along the display boundary. The edge of the screen will stop or "pin" the pointer’s movement at a position over the toolbar, permitting much faster movement to the toolbar. A one-pixel edge will require more careful positioning of the pointer over the toolbar.

Fitts’ Law is one of the most "common-sense" rules for interface design. Tiny and improperly positioned buttons always reduce user speed and increase selection errors. Adequately sized and properly positioned buttons will make the user’s task much easier.

Reference
Fitts, P.M. (1954). "The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement." Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 381-391.

Recognition Awards

By: Al Howick
VP Chapter & Member Relations

Submit your BFMA Member & Chapter Award Points now!

We want to celebrate and recognize your efforts and involvement in the forms industry and education, plus individual and chapter activities.   In May, as part of the 50th Anniversary celebration at Symposium Las Vegas, awards and recognition will be presented to selected recipients. 

You deserve to be recognized!  A recent email was sent to all members giving links on the BFMA Website to the appropriate application form for each award.  Individuals and chapters accumulate points for a wide variety of events and contribution in time and talent.  Submission for the Member Award Program and the Chapter Award Program can be emailed to aladd@mchs.com.  Recommendations for recipients of the Lifetime Achievement Awards (Joe Warner Award & Award of Excellence), Recognition of Excellence (In the Workplace & In Communication) and the Foundation recognition of Premier Chapter Educational Programming can be emailed to leaanne.fuchs@personix.fiserv.com.

Many members are not part of a local chapter but are very active in BFMA.  Please submit a point summary to Alice if this describes you.  Several of you have been long time members and know who has contributed to BFMA so you're well qualified to recommend Achievement winners to Lea Anne. 

Any questions - any confusion - contact Andy@BFMA.org or any member of the BFMA International Board.

Teri Watanabe Speaks About CFSP

By: Teri Watanabe, CFSP

Membership Council, Region I Coordinator

Hello. I’d like to share with you how my name, Teri Watanabe, came to be followed by those four infamous letters “CFSP.” During my recent job search, I hadn’t intended to become a “forms person”; I was looking in the instructional design/corporate training realm. (Then again, at 10 years old, I had thought I was going to be a lawyer — that was before working for lawyers cured me of that desire.) But, through mutual contacts at BFMA headquarters, a local software integration firm came looking for me. I was offered the opportunity to work with a fledgling line of business and shape its future, learn new software, and expand my professional horizons with continued training and development. Everything just so happened to revolve around forms. Look out, forms…here I come!

When I learned that there was such a thing as certification within the forms industry, my manager encouraged me with both training and time. And while my manager wanted to write “Obtain CFSP certification” into my first annual performance goal, I managed to delay it until my second year with the company. I was new to forms, new to the company, and really wanted a way to prepare me for this unexpected career path. I saw CFSP certification as the way to do this.

As a newbie to the forms industry, my background in editing, technical writing, document design, and corporate training served me well in preparing for the exam. I read (and hopefully absorbed) most of the BFMA library resources, as well as soaked up as much Symposium knowledge as I could. However, my contacts within BFMA were the real instructors. Networking with BFMA members and the CFSP Virtual Study Group gave me my true education and (most important of all) emotional support. I would not have attempted the exam without them. The study group was challenging at the beginning; we worked very hard to craft a format and methodology that would best serve rapid acquisition of forms knowledge. Even with all of BFMA’s current resource material, we discovered how big the forms knowledge pool really is. It’s huge! I will ever owe my study buddies eternal thanks for helping me achieve my goal.

The test itself was a computer-based exam with an easy-to-use interface. Four hours is a long time for anything, let alone an examination. I took plenty of breaks (mental and otherwise) to try to stay fresh for the next battery of questions I attempted each hour. Then came the long weeks of waiting for the results.

I remember the day the envelope came (or at least when I opened it). I had just returned from an anniversary trip to Japan with my husband of 12 years. There it was in black and white. I was certified! Those distinguished letters “CFSP” have now graced my business cards, project resumes, and presentations in my daily work in the forms industry. I’m proud to be a “forms person” and even prouder to be a part of the community of forms people within BFMA.

If anyone thinks that studying for certification is difficult, time-consuming, and draining…well, you’re right. It is. But the hard work does pay off — financially, professionally, and in the recognition both inside and outside our industry — and there are plenty of forms people here to help.