 copied your discussion topic too. You can scan through those at home before you do something. And see the kind of work that rates reasonably high. OK, so you should also have two other topics here, which we are going to start after coffee. Ac yn ddod o'r dda, mae'n gw wrthdof yn ei wneud o'r amser, ac yn ddod o'r ffordd. Rydym ni'n edrych yn y gael ymdeithio yma yw amser? Rydym ni'n ddiddordeb yw'r cwmhau a'r cyfnodau fydd yma yw'r 6 mlynedd yn ôl y bydd. Rydym ni'n ddiddordeb yw'r cwmhau, ond mae'n ddiddordeb yn arddangos a'r geisio'r cyfnodau ddim yn ddiddordeb yw'r cyfnodau. Cog nabod eich dda, dw i, mae'n meddwl i'n meddwl yw'n meddwl yn oed o'r ddeud. Mae'n mynd i dda chi gyd o dda i'n mynd, fe dda nhw'n mynd i'ch mynd i ddweud chi ymddangos er mwyn astud. Rydyn ni'n meddwl yw rhan o'r ddeunydd. Oedd y ddweud, mewn y sefydlu, o'n i'n meddwl i'r bobl i'n meddwl i'ch nad yw'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'ch meddwl i'ch yokio ddiodd, Yn gweld y plwy yn y gweithio yr ysgrifetoeddfyn sy'n gweithio'r Morther. Lleodd yn dwy i'r cwmpio yw ychydig yma, yn y gwybodaeth oes bwysig i'r gweithio yma. Gallwn siwr ar y llwy для'i gweithio, mae'n loediau a ni'n fawr i gweithio cymdeithydd sy'n gweithio. Pa yw'r cwmpio cymdeithydd, mae'n un fwy o'n fwy o'r gweithio. Felly rwy'n gweithio'n gweld a'n gweld nesaf o'r gyfr워edd .. y ffordd, mae'r cyd-fod holdsu hynny, ac yn fawr yn cael ei ddechreu i ei wneud yn gweithio'n goonoedd merthoeg. Rwy'n gweld yn fawr o'r siwr, ac mae hynny'n gweithio'r ddechrau o'r hynny, mae'r fenywodau meathodolog, mae'r meistart nesaf yn chi ddwy— i'r eu cyntaf i ymgolio eu cyflawni. So ond mae'n gofio'n meddwl i'r gwybod yma hynny i'ch gyrtodd. Felly, mae'n gwybod i'r bydd, mae'n gofio'n meddwl i'r bydd, felly rydw i'r cyffredinol i'r ffwg ar y bwyd. Mae'n gofio'n meddwl i'r gwybod i'r gwm eich gilydd. Gofio yw'r gwybod i'r gwybod, beth yw'r gwneud hynny'n gwneud ar y bwyd? It's to the change the example. Instead of being, as I said at the start, two hours and a quarter it's going to be one hour 30 minutes with 10 multiple choice questions at start representing one mark each and then a choice of two longer questions. So you get two longer check questions you need to answer one, which gives a total of 20 marks that one question divided into a number of parts. So we've got gut work, two questions, two marks each. Diwethaf a gweithio ar ddech chi'n ddullunio ei ffrwng â ddaraf. Felly ein ddullunio ar ddadech chi, mae'r ddiefnod chi, mae'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod, ac yna'r ddodl am y porffaith yma i'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod i'r ddiefnod. Yna'r ddelfnod o'r ddiefnod maen nhw. Hwnna'n gweithio, mae'n bwysig gweithio a gweithio'r ddiefnod arall. Rydym yn rhoi. Rydym yn rhoi bod yn ysgrifennu sy'n maes ffordd yn siŵn y byddau... ...falle'r byw yn ysgrifennu sy'n maes ffordd yn siŵn y byddau sy'n maes i ffrwng gemu. Roedd kefyd yn ei gondol. Roedd mae'n meddych chi yn gwybodaeth o'r popol yn gyfwyd. Be gael. Roedd e'n meddych chi? Roedd e'n meddych chi e'w meddych chi o'r moddaeth. Mae phir. Yn gyfliwch, mae'n ddweud dyma bryd hynny yng Nghymru. Felly, beth oes yr aelodau sy'n cael ei chyflodd iddyn nhw'n bwysig, ac oes y cysyllt, sy'n gweld i'r bwysig, diwrnodau arall, ond mae'n bwysig, wedi'i iawn i'r hyfyrdd, fel y cyfnod, gan gyfrofiad o'r bwysig. Ond, mae hi alw ffordd a'r gyflawn i'r edrych yn ychwanelwch i ddod yn ddod yn y ddanydd a'r ddyn nhw'n hynny'n ddod arall o'ch eu gydfodd yr oedd rhai ond mae hyn yn fawr taeth o ffordd gyda'r gyflawn yw mynd i'ch nid a byddai'n gweld ffordd i gyd profiad yw ddim yn ddod a'u ddod yn ddod o'u ddod o ddod a ddod i'r cyfeirio ac yn y cyflawn a ddod yn ddod i'r broswch So if I get lots of people who need a piquin because they don't think they've got enough then yeah I suppose we'll have no choice. But it's more worth me some. The problem I like, it's bothering us and looking for people who need one. Anymore questions? Right so we've got six months before. We've got six weeks now or even less oftentimes for trying to oversit information for users. Ryf yn gyntaf, gael wahanol. Rydyn ni'n gwybod, sef y hallu'r tynnu'n bywyd? Rydyn nad oeddwn nhw'n cyhoedd yn yr hyn y plwyd. Yn rydyn ni'n iawn, ddiddor i'r cyffredd yn ddechrau? Rydyn ar gyfer yr lyhyn ymgyrch Kyllidon? Roeddwn ni, yn eu gweld. Roeddwn ni'n gweld, roeddwn ni'n gweld. Roeddwn ni'n gweld? Roeddwn ni'n gweld. Roeddwn ni'n gweld, roeddwn ni'n gweld, bobl nodd bob yn cysylltu. Roeddwn ni'n gweld. Excuse me, yes, you could do Question 걱정, yes? Because they're structured, they presume that we've already know quite a lot. Because you're trying to ask questions in structured formats. So normally a question feels good for quantitative kind of data coming back to you. But the problem with them is that you kind of have to know what the question you're asking is. Can iteration be done on every two weeks period for three iterations? For such two weeks you just get basic information then you do the evaluation and then go back and get more information in the wrong way. If you've got time to do that in the schedule we'll see soon that in real life you often don't get those iterations. It would be nice if we did. You could interpret it as part of, say, a Najas drum or something like that. Focus groups and interviews. That's one of the things you can do. Focus groups can get you a lot of information real quick because you've got lots of people in one room all at one time. It saves you having to go and ask each person an individual question. Problem with focus groups often is that, one, the experiment or the UX that can be kind of guiding what's going on in the group, which isn't necessarily useful or helpful. The other problem with focus groups sometimes is that the person with the loudest voice or the most strong opinion wins. So if I'm really like, yes, I think it should be this, this is what I'm saying is right, then other people who've got good ideas might just stop talking. If you as a UXer need to look at that, what people aren't talking, why aren't they talking? And just what is it that they're not talking in some specific place because they're being shouted down? Because they feel their view isn't valid. The idea is to get all views no matter how ridiculous they may seem. Just as we saw in the previous examples, the reason why people didn't, the thing that made people reduce their energy or increase their energy efficiency most wasn't information on energy but it was information on what their neighbours were doing. And that was shouted down in focus group that looked at those questions and said, no, that's not going to happen. But it was, that was looking factor. So nothing is out of balance. Okay, so you learn by asking here, which sometimes is maybe not such good learning. The problem here that we've got with this course is exactly this. You're learning by me talking to you. You're not learning by, if I own my way using your second vehicle so you can all go and do examples, classes and laboratories. But that's not the way it's going to work. So you're learning by me talking to you in some way while you're reading. She's a bit like this. You're not learning by doing, which is more effective in a lot of ways. But sometimes we don't have a choice. What we like in a perfect world doesn't end with this. Okay, now this is a good one. Social. So the social stuff is very useful if you can possibly do it. You should never underestimate it. So all this means is that you go out with people and have some beers. You get a load of work people or a load of people or load of users in a space where they've had a beer and they're all together. And they all start to tell you everything. All the good bits, all the bad bits, all the bitching, the gossiping, all the everything else. But you can harvest this information from them. And that's a good thing. Because it means that you can actually be there and have some real conversation about what the problem is all with the user experience of certain tools, certain techniques. So it's kind of an observation on small scale. It's relaxed. People need to know that you're there. They need to know that you are going to be taking notes, that there is a purpose to this. Because otherwise they might be saying things that they don't want to be... It's not ethical in general if you're taking lots of notes from people secretly if they don't know that's what you're doing. But most people aren't that bothered if it's in an informal situation and they know that they're going to be none of us, that they know you're not going to make any reference to anybody. It's just a group. So these social aspects are quite good even if you decide not to write anything up. Just going to the public or going into some social event with people allows you to bond with those people, those people tell you things. You might not divulge any of those things, but it might inform how you create the next focus group or the next interview. Okay, okay, so lack of users. If we've got a lack of users, this is another useful technique that we can use. So it's very difficult to get users all the time for those users to be there and available and open and wanting to answer your questions because they've got jobs to do. But what you can do is understand and they do this in archaeology. You understand people by the artifacts that they create. By the artifacts and the tools that they create. They do it in ecology for animals. You understand animals by the traits, by the telltales, by the things that they leave behind. This is exactly this for artifacts. We're looking at the kinds of forms that are used, the kind of jogging on those forms that are used. The way that these tools are put together, the way that people have created, maybe paper-based notes. So who here had a Visit Day interview when they first came all those years and years ago? Or who had a Visit Day interview? Okay, one or two few people. Did you tell a Visit Day interview? You were lucky. Oh dear. Okay, so with that, in that interview you will have gone on a tour of the area, you will have gone down to the atlas room. Not the atlas room, to the atlas rooms down the bottom where there's a little kind of historical museum. And on one of those work surfaces you'll see that people have created sets of paper notes. Okay, to get them around the fact that the actual notes that they were given weren't suitable or useful. That's useful material because it says, one, the kind of training we're giving and the kind of notes and manuals we're giving aren't appropriate or aren't effective. And it also tells us that, hey, there's lots of information on this sheet about what people find difficult and what they need to refresh it in. So if you go down look at that, you can see it right there because that's exactly how it was left when people walked away from it. So these kind of things, these trace elements are useful. Okay, now, this bit yet, but has anybody had an obtuse of observation? Now, okay, so an obtuse of observation relates back a bit to this archive stuff. And we're going to do this in a bit more detail in any way in another lecture, but it's something that might be useful to go in here as well. Obtuse of observation is really about trying to understand users' valuable without intruding upon them. So the way that this is done, conventionally done, is to say social science and that kind of thing, is to look at any kind of thing that's left within the environment. So for instance, people could tell how popular an exhibit at a library at a museum was, not by asking people questions, but how frequently you have to change the floor tiles for the carpet floor tiles, increase where equals increase use equals more people standing around your exhibit equals that's the most popular one. The same is true for say upstairs, in the toilets upstairs here you've got a number of sinks and one of those sinks is stained very dark brown and the reason why it's stained very dark brown is because that's the one that everybody pours the coffee in. So that says to us, wouldn't it be useful if we didn't have to replace that sink every five minutes and because we can't get the coffee stains off, we have some special bin that just says put the coffee in here. That would be useful to say. This kind of an obtrusive observation could be applied in computer science. It's why I didn't have to give you the number of words. So this is something that you could think about when you're doing your work. So we've got onto this getting the information, but we now need to convey that information to software engineers or if you're a software engineer in the system you need to be able to take that information. So who's done things like user stories, case studies, those kind of things from software engineering. Okay, so some people are looking a little bit more deeper. So here is a story card. You can see it on page 106. So this is a story card with notes. And so all this says is that what you have to do is user experience is to process all this requirements elicitation, all this data you require in the requirements elicitation phase. You have to process that down into something that's easily understandable by a user who is a software engineer who maybe isn't pretty soon, who hasn't got the time to analyse that data and maybe won't understand what it is. That's why it needs your expertise. You need to be experts to be able to do this. So more ways to convey information is to write these simple user stories so sometimes we're going to call them scenarios, personas, user stories, case studies, those kind of things. The idea is to allow the software engineer or the technical developer to be placed in the situation or to empathise or to more understand the user and their needs. So it can go from being very unreached to being very sparse like this one is here but couldn't be compared to a job post in the credit card. So that's just a piece of functional requirements in what's called a story card. And it's called with notes because it says here we're going to accept that that's the card we're going to expert as it comes into the school. Easy. That's very simple. So you're able to say well actually this is one of the functional requirements we've got. Now here, too much detail. So it couldn't be compared to a job post in the credit card. There's over $100, blah blah blah blah blah. So this is really instructions. This is moved from being a story to being instructions about collecting the expiration of the date of the card. The system can store the card number for future use. All these things are more about not what needs to be done but how it should be done, how developers should do it. And that's not what we're trying to convey right now because maybe the developer knows better. It's not up to us, the user experience will be able to decide how it's going to be extended. But it might be up to, it's up to the self-engineered story card. Now this isn't a 100% thing as with everything on the user experience. And the reason why it's not 100% is because say for instance scenarios might very well have this kind of information or some of it anyway to make the story richer so that you can be in the place of that person. So, a revised card might be a company-compatible job-hosted company card. No one will accept, will be accepted to school of cards. So that's the only question you might have because you didn't presume you're accepting everything else. Note for the UI, you don't have to deal with the card type. It can be derived from the thirsty users of the card. So this is a bit of additional information which we think the software engineer might not have what we do. So if there's something that you think the software engineer might not have that's beyond, if you like, the normal way that we would expect these things to work technically, we can actually create these. We can create a note that says, think about this. But it's not part of the direct story. Okay, so for story cards, they're pretty straightforward. The only way you can really understand them is to go into a working environment and do it. You can read as many books as you like. There's books in the background. There's no substitute for actually doing it. So story cards, you get the general idea of what these are about. A sort of small snippets of stories that a set of cards, a set of story cards will build up into a larger story, a larger set of small snippets. And it will be the story of both the users and the expected interaction with the system. Okay, so I think this is reasonably straightforward to be all the good. We've been here to challenge you particularly. Okay, use cases. So use cases, as you can see here, have a lot more data in them. And these use cases do talk to us a bit more about functionality. Now it might be that we want to move a standard user story from being something which is very much about analysis of user information to something that's more of a specification for a use case. But we can see here that in these use cases, we have things like triggers. We have things like preconditions and stakeholder interests. And we can see here, we've got stakeholders. This term we have preached is stakeholders, actors, roles, proxies. Okay, from last week. So we can see that these things here are scoping in many contexts. So you can see that we're moving from something that's a user story that's very sort of discursive if you like in some ways, which just says what we want. Here, we've got a lot more information about how we want it to be. Now it might be that we can't fill all the settings to experience people. We don't have all the information. Maybe this trip apart, we maybe don't know so much. Or the description of the actions we might not know completely. But we might. So this gives you a template that you could use. You could use this template in business. If you wanted to make a template like this, you'd be able to move this around in most businesses that do this kind of work. And they'd be able to understand what you're trying to say. Okay? So looking at this, minimal guarantees, success guarantees. Any questions about this use cases? Straight forward. Yeah? Okay, so here's a scenario. And this is a real scenario. So this is taken from the scenario from the website, where it's actually taken. The user agent. The user agent. The word by word. W-A-I user agent. Accessibility by word. It's a technical implementation report. Which is still in draft. So this one here is a scenario about Mary. So it's trying to give you an idea about what Mary wants to do and what the problems might occur. If this success criteria in those guidelines is going to met. So that's what it's trying to give you. The scenario is what will be the problems if this success criteria isn't met. And the reason why we're trying to do that is because we're trying to put knowledge that we have as experts in accessibility in this case into a format that's digestible and usable by people who may be not experts in that area. Now, does anybody know about HL5? What about the WhatWG Working Group? Okay, no? So the WhatWG Working Group is a set of companies that came together when the World UI Work Consulting was looking at developing X HTML on its own. And they wanted something that was a bit more Java-like, a bit more functional, a bit more programmable and so they came up with this idea for HTML5, which then became so all-encompassing that the W3C took on HTML5 and took it out to text HTML. Okay, but... What the point is that HTML, the definition and specification of HTML is created mostly by programs, okay, led by Hixson from Google. So he's got this very definite view of things and so are a lot of the coders who are creating or putting into this specification of HTML5. It's very difficult for them to sometimes understand the true problems that, say, disabled users might have. It's difficult sometimes to understand the problems that mobile users might have. So they're creating a specification based on, by its nature, some kind of, well, their own experiences. And those experiences might not be to do with, say, disability or mobility. And so therefore these scenarios are useful to allow them to put themselves in the context of narrowing this case. So narrows are learning disability. She finds that the images on the page is very distracting. So did we know that anyway? Did you guys know that people with learning difficulties, people with cognitive disability find lots of moving images quite distracting, more distracting than the other people? So now you do. By the scenario. So when the people with learning disability get more information from the images than actually reading the text? That's what you think, but no, the answer's not that. Simplistic text, spoken word, yes, but animated images, lots of different kinds of images, more difficult. Because there's lots of different sensory input in the end. It's difficult to know where to section that input. Okay, so we can see here that Mary would like a certain set of things to occur. This is because we already know that this is right, because we've actually spoken to people with cognitive disabilities, learning disabilities. There's a famous quote in the accessibility community, which is, nothing without us, without us. And we'll be getting on to that. But this time the story is because information, we already know certain information about different kinds of people, and we need to convey that information so that we don't get misunderstanding. Common sense says that, yes, images would be better, but they aren't, because common sense is often not any kind of sense at all. It's just an excuse for their bigotry, mostly, etc. Okay. So, scenario's not pretty straightforward to me. You're creating a scenario that tries to put the software engineer in the context of that person based on your expert knowledge, difficulty, or maybe a sales executive at a large corporation. That's what you're trying to do. That's the put to the scenario. Is that kind of obvious? Is this coming across? We're okay with the scenarios. You could write a scenario in an exam if I gave you a success criteria for it. Could you? Oh, I'm sure. How long could the scenario happen to be? Just a minute. A paragraph. It needs to be digestible. People aren't going to read beyond the paragraph, just like most people don't look at anything beyond the first page of Google Resorts. Yeah? That's why. Okay, personas. Personas are very, very similar. Okay, into scenarios. But the difference for the personas is that you're trying to understand not just about what somebody needs to do as a task, but what they are as a person and general, more broad term, what some needs are. What they want to see in a more broader scale. And then scenarios are about picking out individual tasks from, say, task analysis that we talked about, or participant observation that we talked about and modelling those. This, for personas, is about the person. That's about the task that they're going to be doing. Okay? So you can understand more about that. I don't even care about that. Why are these useful as opposed to scenarios? Yes? It's more background information. Anything else more specific? Is it likely that I can write a scenario about every possible task that might occur? Unlikely. For everybody. Unlikely. I might be writing scenarios about tasks that are most important or tasks that I know. If you've got a general understanding of the person then that gives you the information that you're able to then start to think how would this person handle this then? How would this person handle this? Without an explicit scenario. Is the differentiation okay? Yes? Just to clarify, is the previous example a scenario of a persona? Okay, the only example is of the characters in the persona. Yeah, so there's a persona and the scenario are quite related, as I've said. So you can see those in both different ways, but the difference is that this one here is about things like adding functionality would allow Mary to write things. It's about the task model. Whereas persona is more about the person who can see this here. So this is persona on steroids. So this kind of thing it's difficult one, where you could read it if you know what's in the notes. So here we've got a bit more information about that person. So we can see that we've got a picture to allow us to empathise to understand who that person is better. Okay? The zombie. We've got various details about who she is about this. This is a quote, this is what a major goal is. This thing here is extra bits and pieces about a description about the background of who she is and what she wants. And here we've got various things like goals that she's got. This thing here is really just allowed to allow us to rate or to see how important various aspects of the goals are. So this might indicate what should be developed first or what can be that conversion to. So this is the kind of persona that goes from very small bits of text sometimes combined with scenarios to this kind of thing where we've got actual cards with people and information about those people on them. Now there's an entire database to do with lung cancer patients and lung cancer carers and families who have cancer to allow people to understand more about the needs of the people from actual people, from real people. So this, when you see that as a persona, those as personas they're taken from long longitudinal interviews and there's a lot of information because it's a complicated subject for each individual. I'm just a sensitive subject for each individual. I'm telling you these things not because I'm telling you these things because I don't think you're going to be just sat in a company banging out code every day or doing a new X. You're at the University of Manchester and you're often going to be doing something much different to what you expect on hope. Challenging on hope. So that's the kind of reason why we're talking about things like lung cancer care. Because you might be asked to be doing this. To be creating this. To be talking to people about it. Any more questions about personas? Scenarios? With the personas, so typically how many would you look at because aren't you in danger of being too focused on one individual in general? Yes, in some ways that's the case but what we do normally is that you have your you have a load of personas sorry a load of interviews with say focus groups or case studies with people individuals. So you've either got a focus group or you've got lots of different individual interviews or questions that kind of thing. That's the data of the situation. You analyse that data and try and aggregate it in some way. And then you place that aggregated data as the persona or scenario. So in reality there is nobody called Becky Broadmore. It's just moving. She's just a random person who isn't Becky Broadmore she's off some stock photo. There is no either. There is no marry. These are composites. So in a focus group Becky Broadmore might be focus group might be the results of focus group one. Yeah? Or there might be a couple of these kinds of procedures on steroids from two different opposing ideas from focus group one. Or the aggregated amounts yes. So if they're made up what's the value in specifying the frequency of how people visit to Grendel? What's the value in that? So the value of this one. So Eden was done as we were going to say eight months ago. She has managed the Simpson hope where she found a treatment of the poor words it said a bit when she did it out. But thankfully she sees her grand children after. Think of the reason. But it's made up like what? Yeah but think of the reason it's not made up. I mean it's a composite. So it's made up but it kind of isn't made up because this comes from real people. So not why would I tell you that she lives her grand children and she's 75. It's an indication of the quality of life of how happy she is. When you see some family and grandchildren often it's going to be a reason that she's going to be happy in her own life. That's one reason. Another big reason about contact with people who are who are younger people. So in this case. Any ideas? I would be in know how to use technology. Right. People she's exposed to. Yes, most people certainly what we found with these uncast studies is that if they're older they don't use technology. So therefore the closer they are to having contact with grand kids or their own children, the more likely we are to be able to get information from those sources and not sources that we have. So rather than making some petty specific detail about the frequency of this phicещan charity I would like to say that it's a common character to people in our needs that they have access to young people. Like that they're frequently in contact with people. It's common character that if you have access to young people you're more likely to be able to elicit information that you're not looking for from the net. It's a characteristic of people who don't have access to younger people that they won't get information from the net and they might use other kinds of sources. And those things would be often specified in things like a scenario Roedd wedi bod ni'n colliwch o ei ystafell ac yn storiol ar hyn. Ond yn y gweithio'r storiol yw'rhoedd. A oherwydd yr golon yn cwyl hoffio iechyd yn y rhwyf ar ymwyaf ymlaen. GWyddwn i ddod o anoddiadiaeth yn gallu ei ddalion, ac yn ddifêr, ydych chi'n edrych chi fydden nhw'n gweithio y byddwn i dda. Roedd ydych chi'n cael ei gydig sy'n dda chi arall i'w ysgw Niger, ac mae'n ddysgu'n ddigud yw'r ger mewn i'r unrhyw ffordd oedd o'r unrhyw. y llwyddiad dechrau a'r fawr o'r cynnangolfawr hynny'n dweud beth ddim ty shipswysus, yn llwyddiad a ffysgol ar gyfer gwybod i'r llwyddiadau, dwi'n ddweud a'r llwyddiadau. Y wneud i chi i'w wneud, ond mae'n gweithio ar gyfer ar y cyflawn. O'r paradydd feэnt yn ymgyrch i'r tunig. Oe ydych chi eu tariad, oherwydd herbwysig sy'n cyflawn ome hi. Ychydig i chi ar gyfer y cyflawn o'r paradwysig. Rwy'n dweud, rwy'n dweud. sydd eich rydyn ni'n golygu, mae'n golygu, ychydig yn cychwyn nhw. Rydyn ni'n gwybod i srif,'r cydnod, i'n golygu, ond ei wneud. Mynd i'w gwybod i gyd. Ieithio'r ystod,'r hyd yn golygu i fod y mae'n gyngor i'r ysgrifiadau gwahanol, a chydwch i chi i gyd yn gwybod i'n golygu i'w geisigau, gyda dechreuon mewn cyfreith, chi'n sicrhau ei gallu adeg, a gydwch i chi hefyd o'r ystod. Rydyn ni chi fydda chi gyd, I revenue is not going to be about it, but because you are a software engineer, because you have got a memory, a new brain, you might think in the future, what was that thing around, about the grandchildren? Well, we would use the grandkids, that's the idea, in these broad ones, scenarios, this is why these things are small, specifically for that, but it's mostly functional, because bang, give it to me. Grandma, dwi ddweud ond y peth gweinwyr�n iddyn nhw iddyn nhw. Ac rydym i yn dod i'r falch o'r reu'r rhai rydymhael rhywbeth fân mentwg ar ôl y dweud. I ddweud hynny, ydyn nhw ddim yn dda iddyn nad yw i'r wneud yn ddyn nhw. Wrth gael yn ymdweud etiliad hai'r ddechrau, cwyddo, nid yn eu cyfnodol, byddwn i'n rhaid i gweithio i chi. Ond yn beth sy'n ddyn nhw'n ddyn nhw iddyn nhw'n ddyn nhw, Felly mae'n amlwg, mae mae'n amlwg, mae'n tynnu'n un o amlwg yn ein bodwn yn ei ddweud, fel y bydd wedi bod yn dweud, mae'n dweud bod yn ni'n uddigio'r brifudd yn ein gwsfarchwn, yn ffragventig, aib, ac yn ystod amlwg yn ysteig ffath Yang, ac yn dweud bod yna'r amlwg yn arfer, fel y gallwn yna'n gallu cyd-ionwg ymgyrch. Mae'n oed yn celf. Yn Caes. Mae'n credu bod oeddeoli. I'm making it slightly more relational to the actual person or maybe you can kind of add a sort of black… Basically, I guess the difference between this and having it listed out as functional reasons is that in this case you're more, like, Felly, mae'n gwybod yn dweud i ddweud o'r rhan o'r wneud. Felly, yw'r ddechrau'n gwybod yn ddiddordeb. A o'r ddiweddau, mae'n cyd-diweddau i ddiddordebau o'r ddiddordebau. Mae'n gwybod i'n ffrwng o'r ddiddordeb ddigwyddol, dwi'n gwybod i'r dda. Felly, mae'n gweithio'n ddim yn y ffrwng i ddim yn ei ddiddordeb. Rhaid i siŵt, mae'n ddiddordeb ychydig i'r ddiddordeb. Mae'r bwysig mewn bwysigau yw... Felly mae'r cefnoliau i'r bwysigau, dwi'n ddim eistedd yn ddigon,做d y gallwn eich bod y byd yw yn gweithio, ei hawn o'r pwysig yn gweithio,�ro swyio gwir'n daith hwn oeddi, i'r dda i fi, maen nhw Fred Brox, nad yw y mae Fred Brox yn ei fwy oedda fi, Fred Brox! Mae ydych yn mynd mlynedd. 360rbn, 360rbn? Ych yn gweithio mewn ddysgwyd. Oh, ziwethaf. Therefore the MYTHICAL ALBUM, Okei! The MK360! A'r fysg mae hyn yn cweithio'r knowsang. One of his purposes, you will always make a pilot. You will also make a prototype, even if you don't intend to, you will make a prototype. Okay? That's exactly what it is. You're doing it wrong, you're going to make a prototype, it's just going to be a production prototype which you're going to have to trash. And write the real version. You're going to do it. Okay, any more on this. Felly, y cyfnod hyffordd y gallwn. Yn ddod! Mae oedd eich cyfnod ymlaen i gael eich sgwrs. Felly, y gynnwys yma, byddai'r gwaith ystod gyda'i gwirionedd ym Mhwylol. Yn ei wneud o'r cyfnod ymlaen i'ch cyfnod y dyfnod, oedd y cyfnod eich cyfnod ymlaen o'r cyfnod ymlaen i gael eich cyfnod, oedd eich cyfnod i'r cyfnod ymlaen i gael eich cyfnod, Or when it's narrow focused on just the health related software we're designing, how many classification we ought to make. That's entirely based on the experience of the project. There's nothing I can't tell you that now. The only thing that it counts on is that we're becoming a process of principles we're mafying, designed principles that go on for the next 8 learts in the past 4 weeks, about the kinds of things that healthier 세상 building these systems to make them flexible when customizing them, these kind of things. Mae gydwyddoedd y gallwn cyffredinol yn ymweld ar hyn ar y system yw'r cyffredinol yn ei fod yn ymweld yn ymweld yn y cyffredinol. Aethaf, yna'n gallu bod y byddiau'n mynd i ddweud, ond y fwyaf ar hyn o gydwyddoedd cyffredinol o'r cyffredinol ymweld yn ei fod yn ei fod yn ymweld. Felly mae'n fwyaf i gyda'r cyffredinol. Mae'n gweithio bod ymweld yn cyffredinol. Mae'n gweithio bod yn gweithio, mae'n gwneud ymweld yn ni, ond mae'n gweithio'n ymweld yn ni, mewn bwysigol ydych chi'n gweithio pedalwyr, efallai'r ffioedd y syrfyn iawn yna. Mae'r bwysigol iawn yr un ffioeddyl ac mae'r ffordd i fi'n ei gwaith yn cael eu cynrygiadau ac mae'n pwysigol iawn. I wnaeth gwrs lech â gwahono'r epffol, mae'n fwy ffordd y bwysigol i'r bobl. A hynny i chi'n gwneud yn credu bwysigol, oherwydd mae'n gweithio ac yn gweithio, mae'n gallu wneud yn rhoi bod mae'n certynnu ei bod ein gofynig yw. mae'n wneud ar gyfer wybodaeth wedi'i gweithio'r lleol, byddwn ni'n ei wneud o'r cyffredinol ar y cyfriadau'i gweithio, gwneud i'w ddweud i'r cyffredinol yma, mae'n dweud i ddim yn y cyffredinol wedi'i gweithio. Efallai mae'r gweithio'r gwahodd. Mae'n gweithio i'r gweithio. O'r cyffredinol. Mae'r gweithio'r gweithio. Mae'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio, mae'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. phys i mi peirun perpl Llannu Wyllach Og Morel! Ond iddi di'ch gwrs yn cael erbyn rŵr no blyny additional! Goltho'r hyn o ddim arbenrwysgwyntt, ledig arw MINTAdUllyringau cael hyd yn iedda un o'u phoccini mylladell Ro oùch, ond ychydig yn viad pob ond yglaffydd Dw i ry Lewis Y diew gwble, ni'n oedd y waint im whinesch gyda'rJapanese Mae'n tebwys i'n gweithio pwyd, ein cyf Australia-wyrdd yma i yn ymryd. A ydw i, mae'n ymweld y gwirio yn y defnyddio'r cyflogion. Mae gwrs yn olygu i ymddiadu'r cyfrifiadol i'i unrhyw mwy fwyaf. Os yw'r llunio ychydigau yng Nghyrchfynchau, mae'n byw gwybod i'n fwyaf i'r hydd o'r cyfrifiadol yn gwybod. Yr ysgol ffordd. also it uses being given that they can manipulate themselves like a pen of paper which they can use to draw on themselves Yr fifty-fadwyd is a more user-lo ... lower cost before hand So all of those at the right hand side, lower cost beforehand anybody can use a pen People aren't going to criticise stuff on a machine and they also won't be getting the machine, because they're scared of breaking the software They're scared of it going to penashuns ond nid ddirwfodio'n cael ei ddweud o ddysgu ac rydyn ni'n fath yn gweithio'n ddioedd, ond nid o gwysig o'r ddweud o'r ddweudio. Rhawn, mae'n goio bydd, oherwydd mae'n gwneud o'i ddechrau, mae'n gobeithio'n gweithio'n ddweud o'i ddweud o'i ddweud, ond mae'n gogeithio'n gwneud o'r ddweudio'n gweithio'n gweithio'n ddweud, ond yna y diolethaf, mae'n gobeithio'n gweithio, I prison bangas into make this a rapidly prototype. Build this a rapidly prototype in the end so we can see it really work perfectly. Okay, now! We've got a mock-up to scroll the list of roles. Now this has been actually created by graphic designers. Okay, so it looks kind of a super-comical model game. Okay, so this is a mocking-pilot application and it allows you to see this kind of various Mae'n olygu ymdiannol ar gyfer o gyflaeniaeth yma, felly mae'r cyflaeniaeth rhai o gyflaeniaeth yma eich bod yn amgylchedd. Yn olygu'r ymdiannol, mae'n olygu'r ymdiannol. 1, 2, oedda chi, yna'n gyflaeniaeth eich bod yn y context ymddurau. A oedda chi'n ddod i'r ddod i'r ysbodaeth ymddai gyda'r rhagleniaeth eich bod yn ymdiannol. Mae'r rhai o'r ysbodaeth eich bod yn ymdiannol. Yn dyfoddi'r dod, yn y blynedd i, bod yn ei gael'r ddweud Onw yn ddoi ei cramio, mae i'r chalbau yn ei ddweud? Rwy'n ddweud fi ddweud Rwy'n ddweud? Wrth ym ddweud? Ymddwn e'n gyffredig, mae Government Threat is aethan? Yn dyfoddi'r ddweud, mae'n ddweud cymryd i'r cymryd a'r hyffredig Mae gandlach i'r ddweudio ac i'r rwyddi'n'n drefnig Mae gandlach i'r ddweud Ychydig ar gwael eitha tro wrth gweithes yng Nghymru, cyffredinol Eisteddon Credradau, y lle hwyl pana'r rhaid. Ychydig y gallu bod gyffredinol cerddoeig, ac yn ymdig y gallwn yr gwneud o'r opty, rhai gynnwys cychau hynny, oherwydd dyna, oherwydd mae'n ffasir. Ychyn diodd yn ymddangos ar gyfer yr eisteddon yn ychydig y methu daw, ac mae ar gyfer y tro, mae'n rhaid o'r wneud o amser, ac mae'n rhaid o'r cyffredinol, ym adeiladau. ac mae'r cyfnod yn awrio'r cyd-f comrades. Mae'r cyfromau'r cyron. Gwydwch drwy'n ei fath o'n iawn. Mae'r cyfromau'r cyfromau yn ystod, mae'n fynd i'n morch ei fath o hynny o'r cyfromau hynny i'r cyfromau i'w elio. Rydyn ni i ddweud hynny'n marchwch ar gyfer ymddangos felly â'i bod ymdau o'r cyfromau o'ch mynd i'n gwellwch i'w amdannu eu gwirionydd ar y cyfromau, is to get them to type stuff but we want to get them to type stuff that's certain point slightly when they go downstairs. The only way to do that is to pretend that when they submitted some thing submitted a comment on a mobile device that was on a website. We would expect a confirmation, then some more text to be displayed or in a form to be displayed just like this is. Now what happened is we did it we just, we were I'm going to walk to papers, which one. So this is kind of a wizard of our stuff, storyboarding. So we are all very familiar with storyboarding. Anybody who has done film and all that kind of stuff, storyboarding. So generally what we're trying to do here is have storyboarding with what would happen. So this is kind of... You can think of it in two ways, is sort of the use cases or some cases, user... ysgolion yna yw'r gweld, ddim ydych chi hynny nes i agonir yw fod yn ffordd o'r gwaith ar gyfer ychydigion, cwrs preglwydd y byddem yn host. Bydd y cyfacegau sydd ein byd yn ffynol, yna y maes ei ddargiwyd, sydd pobl yn mynd i gael'r ffynol, yna ym erbyn mewn waith hefyd. Mae'r gweld yn eich bod, mae'n gweld yn eich bod yma peithio ar hyn o'r tŷwys. Mae'r gweld yn eich bod, mae'r gweld yn eich bod, mae'r gweld yn eich bod. The story of the interaction, the story of the task, very, very simple to do, very simple to get wrong, very simple to misstep out. All of this is very simple to misstep out, that's why you need to keep going back to the users. It's very simple to just get yourself into your mindset and then you misstep out. We're okay with the storyboard. Flow charts, if you don't have to use flow charts now, then I suggest you give up. Reality is, loads of these flow charts. Nobody, nobody, very few. Very few people use them for me any more. But what you will find is, millions, millions of scraps of paper floating around the research offices, sculpture works with bubbles and arcs and squares and stuff just drawn in. There's a scribble that nobody understands what it is. You'll see these on post-its, you'll see them on the back of a beer, beer and coasters, these kind of things. Scraps of paper, they're kind of flowing the charts. Yeah, this does this and then we go here. You can do that there. That's really the kind of level that flow charts are at now. We don't have these formal things so much. Sometimes we do for the state transition diagrams where we're looking for a more formal representation of stuff. But flow charts directly, not really. Not so much. It's certainly the type of the type that we're looking for. Okay, so state transition diagrams and state machines. So I expect that most of you will have been taught how to do these in your software engineering to a fashion. Okay, we're not going to get onto them in any detail here. What they do exist, you might need to create these. So there's books and resources that you can look at, conscious of the time. But we don't need to worry about these right now. Is it really happening to state machines and state transition diagrams or that version? Yeah? Okay, urmal. So we've gone to the super formal. Okay, so we're now at urmal stage. So we've all been taught urmal as well. We're all used to doing urmal. In our second year of software engineering we need urmal. We always do urmal on the show. Robert urmaltastic, yeah? Okay. Okay, no bobgau's. Now my shoes go for coffee. We'll be back at 12. Then we'll be starting.