The problem with trees Many systems are organized hierarchically. The CERNDOC documentation system is an example, as is the Unix file system, and the VMS/HELP system. A tree has the practical advantage of giving every node a unique name. However, it does not allow the system to model the real world. For example, in a hierarchical HELP system such as VMS/HELP, one often gets to a lead on a tree such as: HELP COMPILER SOURCE_FORMAT PRAGMAS DEFAULTS only to find a reference to another leaf: Please see HELP COMPILER COMMAND OPTIONS DEFAULTS PRAGMAS and it is necessary to leave the system and re-enter it. What was needed was a link from one node to another, because in this case the information was not naturally organized into a tree. Tim Berners-Lee, Seeing With Fresh Eyes A City Is Not a Tree hierarchywww
Cool URIs don't change An Essay by Tim Berners-Lee www.w3.org What makes a cool URI? A cool URI is one which does not change. What sorts of URI change? URIs don't change: people change them. The User Interface of URLs www
What happens to user experience in a minimum viable product? An Article by Ryan Singer signalvnoise.com "Feature complexity is like surface area and quality of execution is like height. I want a base level of quality execution across all features. Whenever I commit to building or expanding a feature, I'm committing to a baseline of effort on the user experience." There’s a distinction to make: The set of features you choose to build is one thing. The level you choose to execute at is another. You can decide whether or not to include a feature like ‘reset password’. But if you decide to do it, you should live up to a basic standard of execution on the experience side. Features can be different sizes with more or less complexity, but quality of experience should be constant across all features. That constant quality of experience is what gives your customers trust. It demonstrates to them that whatever you build, you build well. Minimum Awesome Product qualityproductsfeaturesux