Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Icons for IBIS [transclusions]
Excellent feedback, Mark. It's good to know how such systems
would be used in the real world. Sounds like transclusions are
more important out-of-the-box than I at first thought. (01)
Mark Westcombe wrote: (02)
> most of my experience is with using cognitive mapping as a notation and
> Decision Explorer as a software, so heed my comments with care. I've
> principally facilitated 1-2 day, face-to-face workshops on strategic
> decisions in the rail industry. Mostly about deciding whether to go ahead on
> bids for tenders for new rail links or airport trains. Cost overruns, or the
> risk of claims being of high concern. Maps have been normally around 350
> nodes, sometimes as low as 200, or as high as 1200 with pre-workshop input .
> I use the transclusive links enormously to help me navigate the
> interconnected maps, edit them and build new maps using old nodes. The
> modelling notation though assumed transclusive links from the start, so
> they're integral to its use.
> The few occasions where I've used IBIS I've built smaller maps over 1-2
> hours and relied on my own memory to navigate the map (sometimes poorly).
> This has mainly been of the 'what /where next' type of decision in
> mid-project. I made use of transclusive links, but I can't say that I
> depended on them. I guess I've internalised them to the extent I've become
> prejudiced to their use.
> Lancaster, UK
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Armstrong <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 4:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Icons for IBIS
> > Mark Westcombe wrote:
> > > I think this is my first post to this list, and I could go on replying
> to an
> > > accumulation of thoughts relating to some of the IBIS discussions that
> > > taken place here over the past few months. I shall endeavour instead to
> > > respond more often in the future and include them there.
> > Great stuff, and welcome. The best arguments about what designs *ought*
> > to be successful are easily refuted by what people *actually* find useful.
> > I'm curious, though. What kind of discussions are you managing with IBIS?
> > I've been assuming that if we had a reasonable tool, even without
> > we could use it to further our deliberations wrt a decent design.
> > Would your experience suggest otherwise?
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com (03)