Format of Question Introductions

[Weichi]

I have some suggestions about introductions of problems, i.e., the information that tells users what they are supposed to do when they are solving a problem. The basic idea is that we should make the question introductions consistent, concise, formal, and informative.

First, each question should only have one place for introductions. Right now, problem contributors can enter introductions at two places. One of them is above the main interface, the other is on the right of the board. This setup can cause a few problems. First, it takes a little time for users to locate the introduction. Second, this can cause confusion to users if they feel instructions in the two places are inconsistent. Third, authors may give more introduction than needed because they feel compelled to fill up both places or simply because they have the room to do so. This redundancy of information will cost users more time on top of locating the introductions. These problems may be minor inconveniences most of the time, but they can be big problems when users are taking time trials. To avoid these problems, the system should eliminate one of two places for future problems.

Second, the system should explicitly encourage problem contributors to keep the introductions formal. Problem contributors should be advised against using "2" for "to", "u" for "you". Sentences should be properly punctuated and capitalized. According to my conversations with people on KGS, some people are concerned about the quality of the problems here. The sloppy introductions of some problems may be one of the reasons that give them this impression. The formality requirements on introductions will not only enhance the quality of the problems, but also lay the ground work for translating the problems into other languages (by volunteers).

Third, all problems should come with an introduction to tell users what to do. If problem contributors do not provide any introductions, the system should provide a default introduction such as "Directions: (Problem Type) What is the best move in this case?" Some problem contributors may feel that they have indicated the task when the specified the type of the question, but users may not always remember to look at the type of the problem. Other problem contributors may feel the tasks of their problems are self evident, but I believe many beginners would appreciate it if they can have clear instructions about what they are supposed to do.

Fourth, there should be a limit on the length of the introduction. I feel that two lines in the new JavaScript interface is an appropriate limit (about 150 characters). In a real game, the introduction to the next move is simply "I have played. Now it's your turn." It definitely takes more explanations to tell a user what to do in a problem, but I don't think users need paragraphs to understand what they are supposed to do. Shortening the introduction will also make it easier to translate them (by volunteers), if one day the web master plans to do so.

If we really want to, we can dedicate a place for problem contributors to tell a relevant tale or to give acknowledgements, but the system should tell the problem contributors that users must be able to solve questions without referring to these tales or extra explanations. To help problem contributors to understand this, the system should keep the extra information hidden in default, and only display it when a certain button is clicked or users choose to view solutions.

Finally, I feel that we should define the above mentioned "introductions" as directions, tasks or missions. Therefore, perhaps the introductions should be prompted with "Directions:", or "Mission:", or "Task:". I believe that this will facilitate the conveyance of information from problem contributors to users.

[adum]

thanks for the suggestions. i've actually been thinking of similar things. i pretty much regret having the whole introduction concept in the first place -- i put it in originally because there was a limit on how much text we could fit in the comment section at the top of the java applet. now we're moving away from java to javascript, which can scroll that text easily...

still, i'd like to formalize the introduction element as information about a problem that is not necessary to solve it like "This position came up in a game between two people at my club. They started slapping eachother after failing to solve it.". any instructions that are required to solve the problem should be placed in the SGF.

i too would like to see proper grammar for all problems.

i'm somewhat conflicted about having instructions for all problems. i feel like the genre gives an implicit instruction, so adding text just duplicates information. on the other hand, it's nice to be able to give users explicit instructions, especially for beginners. i'll think about this.

this is also related to a larger problem i've been thinking about -- how to internationalize all the text inside problems. we need a system that exposes it, but also homogenizes it such that similar text gets lumped together. i've been thinking about this for a while.

[Weichi]

I appreciated that you read through my suggestions. I can see that you have been thinking about the same things and I am sure that you will come up with some good solutions.

I do have some comments on the translation of the text, since it seems that you have been thinking about this issue.

First, I don't think we have to translate all the text. All we need is a just a few words of introduction. Go is "hand communication" (literal translation of the alternative name of Go, 手谈, coined in the Jin Dynasty), not verbal communication. A user only need a minimum of information to figure out what he is supposed to do (and that why we can and should impose a length limit on introductions). As for solutions, you did a very good job providing the solution trees, so I don't see much need for text explanations for solutions either. It is a pity that non-English speakers cannot join the discussion, but it may not be essential.

Second, you can provide standard directions for problem contributors to choose from (e.g., "Capture the the marked stones", "Save white", "Kill white"). Once you have the standard directions translated, the system can automatically plug them in all problems that adopt the standard directions. Problem contributors can choose to have their custom introductions, but they can be encouraged to adopt the standard directions.

Third, to extend the standard directions a little, maybe you can provide standard comments, such as "Right variation", "Wrong variation". Or maybe use symbols instead of words for comments.

Just some random thoughts. I hope they help.

[adum]

i don't know if you've seen the josekipedia site, but this is very similar to what i implemented there. there's a series of standard items you can select from, and then the ability to add custom text alongside. it works fairly well... but for goproblems i'd like the ability to have translations for all the custom stuff too. i'm not sure how much of the comments are repeats and how much are unique.