On Feb 4, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Elizabeth Buie wrote:
Alphabetical order is no better than random order if the user does
not know what to look for. Alpha order aids in scanning through a
list of things with known names, to find the one sought.
I disagree that alphabetical is random; it is quite well-ordered by a
long-set of standing rules. It is also a means of ordering that
people
learn, in Western culture, from the day they begin to learn to
read. As
Chauncey says, it is the way to order when no other order makes
sense.
Hmm, I would have to disagree with this. Alphabetical *is* better
than random order, because human beings don't believe in random
order. We always believe that there is a design of some sort (and
thus we invented god, thank you Voltaire). And thus if your list of
items were "random", users would try to make sense of the randomness,
to impart a design behind it, to figure out what the heck is going
on. To pattern match, if nothing else.
Alphabetic order indicates design intent of some sort, and while some
users might wish for better design (like their country at the top of
the list), at least they won't spend cycles trying to make sense out
of what is supposed to have none. And thus they can move forward
without worrying that they didn't "get" it.
-- Jim
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
