UX process for various products in different development phases

There are a lot of phases to go through in UX and UI design process. In research phase, there are various research methods available and many steps to take to achieve a meaningful result.

I would like to better understand, what UX research methods would be the most appropriate for projects in these cases?

1. Website

  • New website
  • Existing website – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

2. Web app

  • New web app

  • Existing web app – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

3. Mobile app

  • New mobile app

  • Existing mobile app – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

UX process for various products in different development phases

There are a lot of phases to go through in UX and UI design process. In research phase, there are various research methods available and many steps to take to achieve a meaningful result.

I would like to better understand, what UX research methods would be the most appropriate for projects in these cases?

1. Website

  • New website
  • Existing website – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

2. Web app

  • New web app

  • Existing web app – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

3. Mobile app

  • New mobile app

  • Existing mobile app – adding new pages, sections, updating any part, redesign

How can I create a list form with multiple phases of approval?

I want to create a list form in sharepoint online which would have multiple phases of approval (4 to be precise). Suppose the phase 1 (or part 1) of the form is filled, then the user is supposed to wait for approval. Once approved, he should be eligible to fill phase 2 of the form and so on.

Overall my objective is to create a list form with multiple phases. Is it possible to achieve this or something similar in sharepoint online? If so, how?

Where were the ideas of vote, accept and commit phases originally introduced?

In the Stellar Consensus Protocol SCP, the voting procedure follows a 3 phase commit i.e. vote, accept and confirm i.e. see section 5.

Is this a novel introduction or has this been previously been introduced, and if so, where? More specifically, I refer to definitions of these given in section 5.

What are the topological phases of quantum Hall systems?

(Fractional) quantum Hall systems are $ 2+1$ -dimensional models which are said to possess topological order. One (maybe even complete) set of invariants of topological phases in $ 2+1$ dimensions is given that anyon statistics, or in mathematical terms, the (2-extended) axiomatic TQFT of the phase. Both are labelled by modular fusion categories.

Question: Which are the modular fusion categories associated to quantum Hall systems? Is there a table somewhere in the literature that associates to each value of the “filling fraction” (and whatever other parameters there are in quantum Hall models) a modular fusion category?

Also: Quantum Hall systems involve fermionic degrees of freedom. Are they proper fermionic phases? Or are the fermions somehow restricted to local islands of even parity, such that the resulting phases are still bosonic? In the former case, the anyon statistics are not described by modular fusion categories but their fermionic analogue, something like “modular super-fusion categories”.

I guess this is written down at a lot of places, I’m just having a hard time finding it without having to skim through lots of condensed matter literature that I don’t understand.

Research Project Planning – Time estimates for various research methods and phases

Are there any suggested rough estimates for how long user research methods and phases of research planing, execution, and analysis take?

I’m trying to get better at project management and planning more methodically and accurately, which I’ve identified as a major opportunity for me increase my efficacy and impact. There are a few methods I know well enough through experience to estimate and I know how to break tasks down into subtasks for new methods I’m unfamiliar with, but I always get stuck on educated guesses on duration. This is a fundamental issue that has proved elusive to me, so I’m reaching out. I have looked online, in the archives of this list, and in several books about user research. Many practitioners talk about this issues and bring up bits and pieces, but nothing seems substantive enough in my opinion. In my research about conducting research, I’m running into the following hurdles:

  • It seems like there is no consensus on this, as it can vary wildly due to project parameters and the unique needs and constraints at the time of execution.
  • I know that with qualitative research, timing is very difficult to estimate since “information saturation” (inflection point where no new insights are discovered) is an unknown

Perhaps there are guidelines that I’ve somehow missed. If not, there are only two ways to get to estimates (generally speaking) that I can think of:

  • Compile and average times for tasks and phases from a survey of practitioners – at the very least we can get ranges and relative timing differences.
  • Start tracking my own projects and build historical averages – I assume others have done this internally but haven’t shared it publicly.

If this info doesn’t exist, ideally we as a community and cohort of researchers could combine those two methods in a publicly available and updatable format similar to that of salary ranges. I’m imagining a table of research methods and corresponding attributes that could be filtered and sorted with time estimates. I know that resources like this exist but the timing component is what seems to be missing. Perhaps for good reason, but I’d like to have some baseline to draw from.

Thoughts?

Is it code smell for an application to have significant initialization phases?

I have recently been trying to figure out the best way to design the internal structure of a Minecraft-like game. One particular pattern that can make the code much simpler is to have a significant initialization phase, instead of almost everything being static. For example, I can have the different modules call a registerBlockType method as the program starts, instead of having some system in place (maybe compile-time code generation) to have a static-lifetime array of all register block types. Is this code smell? Is it it otherwise a problem? If so, what is a better way to avoid things along the lines of compile-time code generation? My instinct says that such dynamic registration is a terrible idea, as it flies in the face of C++ being hyper-efficient (and, surely, loading a pre-constructed array of blokcs from the hard drive is more efficient than constructing it via method calls spanning huge parts of hte program), but it also tends to make the code extremely messy and complex.