User-centered designers believe that good design starts from a deep understanding of the actual people who will use a product, and how they will use it.. But we also know that creating intuitive, user-friendly designs requires some consistency, so that users do not have to learn each page, site or product over and over.
以用户为中心的设计师信奉优秀的设计来源于对于真实用户以及他们对于该产品时使用方式的深入了解。但我们也知道为了避免用户多次学习各个页面，站点或产品，一个直观及友好的设计需要考虑一致性。

What about usability practice? Do our choices of methods, techniques and process also depend on our projects and what our organizations need? Are there common aspects to our practice that are shared around the world? Can standards help improve the usability of our products? Are international standards important in connecting practice in a connected world?
那么怎样实行可用性呢？我们是否需要根据我们的项目以及公司组织的不同而选择不同的方法，技术及流程呢？各种实行的方式是否具有一些共性呢？我们是否可以通过使用标准来提高产品的可用性？在当今这个彼此连通的世界中，国际性标准对于实践的相互连接是否重要？

In the world of technology, standards have made many of our new high-tech products possible. Technical standards, such as those from IEEE, help many different companies make products that can work together. We're probably all familiar with standards such as Ethernet (networking), USB (the universal serial bus), TCP/IP (the communications standard for the Web), 802.11 (wireless networking), and so on. These technical standards help create a technology platform, by establishing the rules for different products to work together.
在技术世界中，标准使得许多新型高科技产品成为可能。技术标准，譬如IEEE标准等帮助许多公司创造了可以共同工作的产品。或许我们对于Ethernet,USB,TCP/IP,802.11等标准都比较熟悉，这些技术标准通过为各种可以共同工作的产品建立规范来建立技术平台。

Design and process standards are different from these technical standards. Technical standards tend to be written for a specific technology and to be very detailed in how to create a product that meets the standard.
设计及流程标准和这些技术标准有所不同。技术标准是为了某种特定技术而写的，并且非常详细地说明了如何创造一个符合该标准的产品。

• " Process standards tell us how to work, which methods to use, and how to integrate with other processes. They describe methods and outline what should be done, in what order, to succeed in a project.

• " Design standards set rules for good design. Corporate rules for the use of a logo are design standards, as are guidelines for use of color, layout, navigation or interaction.

• " 流程标准告诉我们如何工作，用哪一种方法，以及怎样和其他的流程进行整合。这些标准描述了为了项目的成功，我们要以怎样的顺序去应用哪些方法。

• " 设计标准为优秀的设计设置了规范。公司对于标志的运用属于设计标准，对于颜色，布局，导航或交互方面的指导方针都是设计标准。

Both are difficult to both write and enforce. Even when there is general agreement on a design principle, the diversity of industry practice and content has made it difficult to create strong standards to embody usability knowledge. Both have to find the line between vague principles and excessive detail.
标准的编写和执行都是很困难的。即使在设计准则上达成了一致，由于工业实践和内容的不同，也会使创建强有力且嵌入可用性知识的标准变得困难。两者都需要区分含糊不明的准则和过多的细节。

Many professionals don't like standards-especially design standards, feeling that they get in the way of innovative work, and that they stifle creativity. Bill Killam and Marguerite Autry made a similar point in a paper from STC-2004, "Are Design Standards Any Use for Designing Systems?". They examined several types of standards and concluded that, "..design guidelines...are all valuable, but are best for teaching and learning - not for doing. Designers should know them before starting a design." In other words, the standards should reflect best common practice, which should be well-known by designers.
许多专业人士并不喜欢运用标准-尤其是设计标准，因为他们认为标准对于他们的创新工作是一种束缚。Bill Killam和Marguerite Autry在他们发表于STC-2004的论文中也提出了类似的观点，"设计标准对于系统设计到底有何作用？"他们在测试了一些不同类型的标准后进行了总结："…设计指导方针…都是有用的，但他们最好是被用在教学中，而不是真正的设计实践中。设计师在开始设计前需要知道这些指导方针。"换句话说，这些标准应该反映的是最好的通用的实践经验，并且应该为设计师们所熟知。

Even worse, standards do not seem to guarantee that products created with their guidance will really be usable. A recent case in point is a UK Disability Rights Commission report said that not only were sites not meeting accessibility standards, but that even compliance did not always provide good accessibility. In this case, even when a site did meet the requirements for accessibility, the result might not meet the goal of providing access for people with disabilities. (UK Disabilities Rights Commission, "Formal Investigation: The Web: Access and Inclusion for Disabled People." 14 April 2004 http://www.drc-gb.org/publicationsandreports/report.asp ). In other words, design standards are only a starting point for good design.
不止以上论点，对于标准的看法还有更糟的，认为标准似乎并不能保证产品的可用性。在近期的英国残疾人权益委员会报告中指出，不仅网站没有符合无障碍标准，连符合标准的站点也没有做到很好的可进入性。这说明即使一个站点确实符合了无障碍性的要求，结果却并没有达到为残疾人士提供入口的目的。（英国残疾人权益委员会 "Formal Investigation: The Web: Access and Inclusion for Disabled People."2004年4月14日 http://www.drcgb.org/publicationsandreports/report.asp ）换言之，设计标准只是优秀设计的起始点。

With so many points against them, is there a value in standards? I think there is, but only if we understand how design and usability process standards can succeed. Let's look at some of the standards that are often mentioned as important to usability practice, and see how or why they have succeeded.
有如此多反对设计标准的论点，那么这些标准究竟是否有存在的价值呢？我认为有，但只有我们理解了设计和可用性流程的标准才可以成功实现它的价值。让我们来看一下那些经常被提到的，被认为是对于实行可用性有重要意义的标准，来了解一下这些标准是如何以及为何成功的。

Defining usability
定义可用性
Many papers, articles and presentations include a definition of usability, and often the one they use is this:
许多论文，文章以及讲座都会谈到可用性的定义，通常被引用的都是如下定义：

"[Usability refers to] the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of user."
"可用性是指以有效性、效率和满意度为指标，产品在特定使用背景下为了特定的目的可为特定用户使用的程度。"

This definition is from "ISO 9241-11:1998 Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) -- Part 11: Guidance on usability." The whole standard covers many aspects of computer interfaces, especially ergonomic requirements.

Although many people know this definition, I'd bet that not many people have ever read all seventeen parts to ISO 9241, or even know the complete title of the standard it comes from. It has become part of our shared professional language.
这个定义摘自"ISO 9241-11:1998对带有显示终端（VDTs）的办公室工作的人机工程需求-第十一部分：可用性指导"。整个标准涵盖了计算机界面的许多方面，尤其是人机工程方面的需求。
尽管许多人知道这个定义，但我敢说没有多少人读过ISO9241的所有十七个部分，甚至没有多少人知道这个定义所属标准的完整名字。这已成为一部分我们共享的专业语言。

Defining a user-centered design process
定义以用户为中心的设计流程
Another standard that is often quoted is "ISO 13407: 1999 Human-centred design process for interactive systems.". This standard describes a general industry approach to UCD, based on five activities:

1. Acknowledge the need for user-centered design and plan for it.
2. Understand and specify the context of use
3. Specify user requirements.
4. Produce design solutions.
5. Evaluate designs against requirements.

另外一个经常被引用的标准为"ISO13407：1999 针对于交互系统的以人为中心的设计流程"。这个标准基于以下五点描述了一个实现以用户为中心的设计的大体的工业步骤：

1． 认识到以用户为中心的设计的必要性，并且进行计划安排
2． 理解并明确运用情境
3． 对于用户需求进行详细说明
4． 制定设计方案

依据需求来评估设计

This diagram and a similar list of activities has been spotted in conferences, articles and company Web sites around the world. This provides good evidence that ISO 13407 represents a truly international view of standard practice, even if there are local or corporate variations. Does this guarantee that user-centered design is practiced exactly the same way, everywhere. Perhaps not. ISO 13407 is a very general description of a process: it requires no specific activities, defines no deliverables, and has no test for conformance to the standard.
此图及与其类似的行为列表被世界上各种会议，文章及公司网站所提及。这很好的证明了即使存在一些地方性或公司的不同，ISO13407代表的是真实的从国际性角度出发的标准实践。但这是否保证了以用户为中心的设计在任何地方都完全地被以同样的方式实施呢？恐怕并不是这样。ISO13407对于流程只是非常大体的进行了描述：它并没有提出任何特别的行为上的需求，没有定义流程中需要交付出什么，并且没有提供可以用来检查达标性的测试。

This leads to the obvious question of its value. Perhaps its lack of detailed prescriptions is also its strength. By being loosely descriptive, it enables organizations to take steps towards a UCD process under its umbrella. Corporate usability processes can use it as inspiration, while still adapting to their own product development processes. Published methods can claim it as a "parent", with little fear of contradiction. Government documents can cite it without introducing the substantial burden of detailed requirements.
毫无疑问，大家会对此标准的价值有所怀疑，但是或许缺少具体的指示正是它的强势所在。由于定义宽松，各种组织可以在它的保护伞下一步步进行以用户为中心的设计流程。公司可用性流程可以在它的基础上使用适合自己的产品开发流程。被公布的那些方法可以宣称它为"父母"而不用害怕任何冲突。政府部门的文件可以在不用承担介绍具体需求的潜在负担下引用它。

It's main value, therefore, is in building a consensus around an approach that incorporates usability into a design and development process. It allows for experimentation and innovation around the common core understanding, in an emerging discipline.
A good summary of this standard is online at User Focus "ISO 13407" http://www.userfocus.co.uk/resources/iso9241 /iso13407.html
由此可以看出，这个标准的主要价值在于建立一种为大众所肯定的，可以将可用性融入到设计及开发流程中去的方法。它使我们可以在一个新兴学科中，围绕着一个共同的核心的理解进行自己的试验和创新。
在User Focus"ISO13407"中有对于此标准较好的总结,网上地址如下
http://www.userfocus.co.uk/resources/iso9241/iso13407.html

Providing access for all
为所有人提供网络入口
One of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) projects is the The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). The WAI addresses not just technical requirements, but a social goal, as stated in the quote from Tim Berners-Lee, W3C Director and inventor of the World Wide Web, "The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect."
W3C协会（World Wide Web Consortium）有一个项目为WAI(Web Accessibility Initiative)。WAI不仅强调技术需求，同时也是一个社会性目标，引用W3C主任及万维网创始人Tim Berners Lee的话来说，"网络的力量在于广泛性。让所有人包括残疾人士可以进入网络世界是非常基本的一个方面。"

The WAI sets guidelines for authoring Web sites that are accessible to people with disabilities and those using assistive devices. Their core work is the Web Content Authoring Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG), which defines three levels, called Priorities, of design and coding practice, each with higher levels of difficulty. The WAI also publishes a collection of advice, tools and other informational material to help web authors create accessible web sites at its Web site: http://www.w3.org/WAI/
为了让残疾人及那些需要使用辅助设备的残障人士可以进入网站，WAI设立了一些指导方针。这些方针的主要部分为WCAG(Web Content Authoring Guidelines 1.0)，它为设计和编码定义了三个层次，在方针中称为优先级，每个优先级对应不同级别的难易程度。WAI还发布了一个集建议，工具及其他信息材料的合集，这个合集可以帮助网络拥有人在WAI的网站（http://www.w3.org/WAI/）建立可进入性的网站。

Activities of the W3C usually garner wide attention, but the WAI has also been used as the basis for national legal regulations about accessibility in the US, Canada, Australia, UK and many other countries. This not only gives it a special status, but there is a micro-industry that has sprung up to provide training, technical support and tools to help companies and government agencies comply with the regulations. It may be one of the best known standards, especially in the general world of web design and development.
W3C的活动通常都会获得广泛的注意，但WAI同样也在美国，加拿大，澳大利亚，英国及许多其他国家被用作为关于可进入性的国家法律规章的基础。这不仅使WAI获得了特殊的地位，同时也带出了一项微型工业，那就是通过提供培训，技术支持及工具来帮助公司和政府代理处的行为符合此规章。这个标准或许是最有名的标准之一了，尤其是在网络设计和开发的大环境中。

However, despite all this attention and being backed by legal requirements, there is some evidence of only limited compliance. Almost five years after the WCAG was accepted, few sites achieve more than Priority Level 1 compliance. And, as we saw in the report from the UK, even sites that do comply may not be really accessible.The two biggest complaints of those trying to make their sites accessible are contradictory. First, there are charges that WCAG guidelines are too onerous, and cause hardships for Web developers. But developers and designers who have embraced accessibility also complain that the WCAG guidelines are not specific and prescriptive enough to help them work effectively.
然而，尽管受到了注视以及具备了法律需求的支持，有证据显示WAI的方针仍然只能被有限性的服从。在WCAG被接受将近五年之后，很少有网站可以达到超过第一优先级的目标。另外，从来自英国的报道里可以看到，即使有的网站确实达到了标准，它也并不是真的无障碍。来自于那些试图使他们的网站可进入的人有两大抱怨，而两者确是互相矛盾的。首先，WCAG指导方针太过琐碎，由此提高了网络开发人员的难度。但是那些实现了无障碍性的开发人员和设计师却又抱怨说这些方针还不够明确细致，使得他们无法高效地工作。

From this feedback, it seems that when a specific result is desired, or when there is a legal requirement, even usability standards should be precise enough to be followed exactly by those who wish (or need) to do so.
从这些反馈来看，当期望获得某种效果或当有法律需求时，即使可用性标准也需要定义得足够精确，如此才可以让人们完全准确地按照它去做。

Gathering best practice in web design
收集最好的网站设计实践
The Research-Based Web Design and Usability Guidelines from usability.gov are an excellent example of a "bottom up" approach to creating a design standard. Rather than starting from a small group of experts, this project gathered the best usability knowledge from the field. Guidelines went through a peer review process, had to have support from both academic research and professional practice before they were accepted. The guidelines are available online at http://usability.gov/pdfs/guidelines.html
对于"由下至上"来创建设计标准的方法来说，来自于usability.gov的基于研究的网站设计和可用性指导方针是一个非常好的例子。不同于由一个专家小组开始，这个项目从这个领域收集了最好的可用性知识。指导方针要通过专家评估，必须先获得学院研究和专业实践的支持。该方针可以在以下地址获得 http://usability.gov/pdfs/guidelines.html

The result is a collection of "best practices" that address specific common problems or design elements in web sites, and thus provide building blocks out of which a usable site could be created. In this case, each guideline is specific, including short commentary, examples and references. Each guideline is also rated for the strength of support found for it, and for how important an expert panel judged it to be in creating a usable site. This enables professionals to choose the guidelines that are appropriate for their audience and context. In this case, specific advice is presented in a flexible way.
这个方法的结果是获得一个具有最好实践性的合集，这个合集包含了在网站中某些普遍存在的问题或设计元素，这样通过阻止产生这些问题，一个可用的网站就可以被创建了。在这个方法中，每条方针都是独特的，包括简短的注释，例子及参考材料。每条方针也都根据其所受支持度，由专家评审的在创建可用性站点中的重要性两个条件被分为不同的等级。这样专家们可以选择适合他们的听众及情境的方针。通过这样的方式，各种建议可以被以比较灵活的方式表达出来。

When to be "weak" and when to be "strong"
各标准的强弱点
In these examples, we have seen four standards, each of which took a different approach in building a shared understanding of usability practice.
在这些例子中，我们介绍了四种标准，每一种都用了不同的方法去建立对于实行可用性的共同理解。

• " The ISO 9241 definition is widely accepted, even among professionals who know nothing else about that standard.

• " The human-centered design approach in ISO 13407 matches many industry methodologies, providing a general umbrella under which they can all co-exist

• " The Web Accessibility Initiative is widely espoused, and has been implemented as national legal regulation, though complete implementation is rarely achieved

• " The Research Based Guidelines are guidelines, rather than a standard, but serve the field as an organized collection of current best practices

• " ISO9241的定义被广泛接受，甚至那些对此标准其他方面一无所知的的专家也普遍接受这个标准

• " ISO13407中的以人为中心的设计方法可以匹配许多工业方法，并且提供了这些方法可以共同存在的依据

• " WAI是一个被广泛赞成的标准，尽管很少有人可以完全实施它，它仍被作为国家标准所实施，

• " 基于研究的指导方针是一种指导而不是标准，但是它作为目前最好的实践性的合集而服务于这个领域。

We have also seen that a loose standard can be as effective as a strict one when it engages professionals and provides a way for people around the world to share a view of their practices.
我们同样也看到了当一个制定得并不详细的标准可以让全世界的人们共享他们的实践经验时，它可以和制定详细的标准一样有效。

About the Author
Whitney Quesenbery (Whitney Interactive Design) is a user interface designer and usability specialist with a passion for clear communication. She creates new concepts for product designs and has produced award winning multimedia products, web sites, and web & software applications. She works with large and small companies around the world.
Whitney is President of the Usability Professionals Association (UPA), and was named an Associate Fellow of the Society for Technical Communication (STC). As a director of the Design for Democracy (a strategic initiative of UPA and AIGA), and an appointed member of a US government advisory committee, she works to ensure the usability of voting systems.
Whitney Quesenbery(Whitney交互设计)是一位对于实现清楚有条理的交流充满激情的UI设计师及可用性专家。她为产品设计创造新概念，并且设计出了多种受好评的多媒体产品，网站以及网络和软件产品。同时，她也和世界上各种大小型公司进行合作。
Whitney目前为可用性专业协会(UPA, Usability Professionals Association)主席，并且被任命为技术交流学会(STC, Society for Technical Communication)的副院士。作为为民主而设计的主管（UPA和AIGA的策略计划）和美国政府建议委员会的指定成员，她也为确保选举系统的可用性而工作。
Whitney其他的关于标准和风格指导等文章可以从她的网站中获取，网址如下
www.wqusability.com
建立一个较好的风格指导 :
http://www.wqusability.com/articles/better-style-guide-paper.pdf
用风格之道来建立共识 ：
http://www.stcsig.org/usability/newsletter/0104-consensus.html

本文由作者Whitney Quesenbery授权UPA China 刊载,请勿擅自转载。