The Mapping Portal is dead Friday, Jan 11 2008 

Uncategorized datasandwich 9:15 pm

We spent the first part of the week with mapping sherpa James Fee, who filled our brains with much to ponder. One a-ha that emerged for me out of our discussions was that the days of the web-based “Mapping Portal” are numbered.

Why have a portal for data that just happens to have a geospatial component? Some data belongs on a map, some in a table, some in a paragraph as part of an analysis. The format the data is in is less relevant than what the data is about. I don’t call my bookshelf a “paper portal” and the fact that some content happens to be in a book doesn’t matter — what matters is the content in the books.

There are two perverse side-effects of a GIS portal: it ends up mapping things that shouldn’t be mapped, and missing things that are important.

  1. Mapping things that shouldn’t be mapped: A GIS Portal rapidly descends into being a repository for data that doesn’t really have a geographic relevance. For example, let’s say you want to map social services. Some might be geographically relevant (where the food pantries are located and clients pick up their food baskets) but some are not (like the locations of the Meals on Wheels kitchen, which is not relevant because the meals are delivered to clients’ homes).
  2. Missing things that are important: When you’re trying to understand the resources available to the community, if you’re only looking at resources that are mappable (like the location of walk-in mental health crisis centers), then you’re missing a huge piece of the solution (phone-based mental health crisis counseling).

Irrational Exuberance

GIS Portals emerged when the technology itself was novel and merely having a GIS Portal was considered a sign of success. (This reminds me of the early nineties when web sites just had to exist and be cool, not necessarily fulfill a real function.) I think we’re moving on… the next evolutionary step is GIS that serves a purpose, with the focus on information products, with well-defined users and tasks they will accomplish with the data. This is a lot harder to design, though, than a GIS Portal where you throw in all the data you’ve got and the kitchen sink and satisfy yourself with the use case of letting users “explore the data.”

 

Can gov’t data warehouses ever be user-centered? Friday, Jan 11 2008 

Uncategorized datasandwich 3:38 pm

I’m writing a paper on evaluating state government web-based data query systems and am beginning to wonder if a single web site designed for “the general public” ranging from scientists to curious lay-citizens can ever really be user-centered.

The typical approach to creating data systems for such a wide audience is to 1) inventory all the data sets the department wants to publish 2) specify functionality for the query system (often based on ideas gathered in focus groups, or staff meetings), 3) build the system, 4) design the interface and solicit feedback from users on what they think of the system. Sometimes, two interfaces are designed (“easy” and “expert”), and subsequent user challenges in using the system are addressed with training workshops and “read me first” instructions. This approach is technology-centered.

User-centered design, in contrast, has developers 1) begin with a thorough analysis of segments of the audience (i.e., researchers, nonprofit grantwriters, and local government health departments) and what tasks they need to accomplish on the system, 2) choose data sets and methods for displaying the data to support the tasks users need to accomplish, 3) build low-fidelity prototypes (such as paper printouts, or “scotch-taped” mockups of the proposed interface design), and test with prospective users, 4) build the system, incorporating feedback from iterative testing. The result of a user-centered approach is a data system that allows users to focus on the information within it, rather than struggling with how to use the system itself.

Problem is, that when gov’t entities focus on the final packaging of data for a broad public, they lock up their data in clumsy interfaces — typically not really meeting the needs of the general public, and preventing access to the raw data for more data-savvy folks who would know how to analyze the data.

If you’re audience is everyone, then you’re probably actually meeting the needs of no one.