<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Card Sorting Doesn&#8217;t Cut the Custard</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.zefamedia.com/websites/card-sorting-doesnt-cut-the-custard/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.zefamedia.com/websites/card-sorting-doesnt-cut-the-custard/</link>
	<description>Ideas &#124; Strategy &#124; Service Design &#124; User Experience &#124; Emerging Technologies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 22:48:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: SharePoint Evolution Conference Findability Slides at SharePoint Config</title>
		<link>http://www.zefamedia.com/websites/card-sorting-doesnt-cut-the-custard/comment-page-1/#comment-306</link>
		<dc:creator>SharePoint Evolution Conference Findability Slides at SharePoint Config</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 16:54:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.zefamedia.com/?p=758#comment-306</guid>
		<description>[...] While a supermarket is constrained by physical space and storing products in multiple places isn’t feasible this doesn’t apply to content management systems. Once the system is up it doesn’t matter how many pages we show this item on. As a result we can focus on how users look for information and provide multiple classification schemes and put information in places that make sense to different people. Note I’ve built this on a similar concept covered by Zef Fugaz (who was responsible for the User Experience side of the Ministry of Transport Intranet) in his article Card Sorting Doesn’t Cut the Custard. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] While a supermarket is constrained by physical space and storing products in multiple places isn’t feasible this doesn’t apply to content management systems. Once the system is up it doesn’t matter how many pages we show this item on. As a result we can focus on how users look for information and provide multiple classification schemes and put information in places that make sense to different people. Note I’ve built this on a similar concept covered by Zef Fugaz (who was responsible for the User Experience side of the Ministry of Transport Intranet) in his article Card Sorting Doesn’t Cut the Custard. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rick davies</title>
		<link>http://www.zefamedia.com/websites/card-sorting-doesnt-cut-the-custard/comment-page-1/#comment-279</link>
		<dc:creator>rick davies</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:01:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.zefamedia.com/?p=758#comment-279</guid>
		<description>Given the dicussion above, you may be interested in how to create network visualisations of the results of card sorts, showing: (a) how sorted items are related, (b) how the categories used to sort them are related, (c) how the respondents are related. 
Go to: http://mande.co.uk/special-issues/participatory-aggregation-of-qualitative-information-paqi/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Given the dicussion above, you may be interested in how to create network visualisations of the results of card sorts, showing: (a) how sorted items are related, (b) how the categories used to sort them are related, (c) how the respondents are related.<br />
Go to: <a href="http://mande.co.uk/special-issues/participatory-aggregation-of-qualitative-information-paqi/" rel="nofollow">http://mande.co.uk/special-issues/participatory-aggregation-of-qualitative-information-paqi/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EphraimJF</title>
		<link>http://www.zefamedia.com/websites/card-sorting-doesnt-cut-the-custard/comment-page-1/#comment-249</link>
		<dc:creator>EphraimJF</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.zefamedia.com/?p=758#comment-249</guid>
		<description>Enjoyed the post and comments thus far. 

I manage a wiki-based intranet that doesn&#039;t have common CMS features which would allow pieces of content to automatically surface through multiple navigation paths. Folks find content either 1) through site navigation, 2) through the search engine, or 3) through social discovery (e.g. seeing newly created or edited content in relevant Recent Activity feeds throughout the site). 

As such, we are limited to a single navigation scheme, though we can manually insert cross-links and we can ensure findabilty (through the search engine) by making content really good. 

Because we don&#039;t use a CMS, card sorting is still a useful tool in our intranet design and redesign processes. I suppose point to draw out is that card sorting should be used in a thoughtful and strategic way, and not as a default IA method...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Enjoyed the post and comments thus far. </p>
<p>I manage a wiki-based intranet that doesn&#8217;t have common CMS features which would allow pieces of content to automatically surface through multiple navigation paths. Folks find content either 1) through site navigation, 2) through the search engine, or 3) through social discovery (e.g. seeing newly created or edited content in relevant Recent Activity feeds throughout the site). </p>
<p>As such, we are limited to a single navigation scheme, though we can manually insert cross-links and we can ensure findabilty (through the search engine) by making content really good. </p>
<p>Because we don&#8217;t use a CMS, card sorting is still a useful tool in our intranet design and redesign processes. I suppose point to draw out is that card sorting should be used in a thoughtful and strategic way, and not as a default IA method&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
