New Year's Text for Analysis and Debate...

[John A. Bateman]

> What RST list are you suggesting for this task? We have the classical
> one (Mann & Thompson), Mick´s, Marcu´s, at least.
> 
> It would be interesting to have only one RST relation set, otherwise
> we will come up with too diverse analyses.


Good point! I used what in Mick's coder is described as the ExtMT.
So, slightly extended classical. But I try and stay to the main
classical relations in any case unless there is very good reason not to...

Here also is the text to be analysed: sorry this was expressed poorly
in the email, the text is under the weblink; but now it
is here too:

"Projects that involve making complex information understandable come
to us in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes the project is a massive
publication system or a series of textbooks. It can be a complicated
retail branding or identity program. Often it is a wayfinding and
signage system for a complex building. However, some basic design
principles apply across all categories, and generally, the more
complicated the problem, the simpler the solution must be. These
projects take years to complete. They are a true test of communication
design, patience and tenacity, and leave little room for creative
self-indulgence. Our experience shows that there are two steps to
solving these problems successfully. First is to "engineer" the
solution correctly, focusing on the invisible infrastructure until the
raw concept emerges. Second is to provide a visible "architecture"
which communicates how the system works and engages people to try it,
trust it and ultimately rely on it. Understanding the users and
appreciating their lack of sophistication by employing the obvious are
often key to finding the right solution. Designers sometimes have a
fear of being "too obvious". But, when solving complex problems, the
obvious may be just what the end user needs."

Best,
John.