This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

2nd Review Meeting for Revision of Service Design Guidelines

Last Updated:

Overview

Date and

Tuesday, December 17, 2024, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

US>

Online meetings

Agenda

  1. Explanation of the purpose of the meeting
  2. Gathering opinions on the guidelines
  3. Summary of the results

Material

References

  • Reference: "Service Design Related Guidelines Draft" * Only for members

List of Attendees

Members (in the order of 50 Japanese syllables / Honorifics omitted)

  • AKASAKA Bunya (Senior Researcher, Human Augmentation Research Center, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science
  • Masaya Ando (Professor, Department of Intelligent Media Engineering, Chiba Institute of Technology)
  • Yoshihiro Ito (President, NPO Information Gap Buster)
  • Tetsuya Uda (Director of FUJITSU LIMITED Design Center)
  • Mikie Oi (Integrated Design Laboratory, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation)
  • Mayumi Saotome (UX/HCD Promotion Group, Quality Management Department, Sony Group Corporation)
  • Yumiko Tanaka (Head of ExperienceDesign, Innovation Center (KOEL), NTT Communications Corporation)
  • Atsushi Hasegawa (Professor, Faculty of Design and Architecture, Musashino Art University, President of Socket Co., Ltd.)
  • Naotake Hirasawa (Professor, Department of Social Informatics, Otaru University of Commerce)
  • Shinichi Fukuzumi (Deputy Team Leader, RIKEN Center for Innovative Intelligence Research)
  • Rei Yamamoto (Free Co., Ltd.)
    *An individual hearing will be held on Tuesday, December 24, 2024 because Mr. Fukuzumi was unable to attend on that day.

Digital Agency (Secretariat)

Technical Review Meeting Service Design Task Force

Summary of the Proceedings

Summary of Opinions from Members

1. Explanation of the purpose of the meeting (Q & A)

  • Should usability guidelines or security and procurement guidelines include problems caused by human factors and use errors?
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) We are promoting horizontal cooperation with teams working on security by design and privacy design so that they can develop as a trinity. Both teams are responsible for issues such as use errors. This time, the usability guidelines include setting appropriate safety goals and identifying hazards.
  • GOJ requests USG to clarify the definition and scope of service design in this Study Group and the Guidelines. GOJ requests USG to explain the meaning and significance of including specific matters such as website design and usability in the service design in the Guidelines sent in advance.
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) There are two systems to be discussed in this study group, one is how to design complicated systems and the other is how to approach from the area of policy design. The former is the guidelines and manuals for providing various services through websites and apps, which will be discussed in the second meeting. Regarding the latter, there are various issues, and the Digital Administrative and Fiscal Reform Council is trying to formulate policies based on the service design method. Since the definition and scope of service design are not the contents that can be discussed in this year's study group, we would like to discuss it repeatedly including next year and later.
  • Is there a consensus among the Cabinet Office and each Ministry regarding the duty and the duty to make efforts? Also, please explain since it was not possible to determine the duty and the duty to make efforts in the guidelines.
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) Regarding the duty and the duty to make efforts, consensus will be obtained through meetings with each ministry and agency from January 2025. Since it can be made mandatory only after feasibility is considered and each ministry and agency agrees, the focus will be on how it can be included in the description when resources are limited.
    • (Response: Digital Agency) Regarding the distinction between the duty and the duty to make efforts, if it is written in a decisive tone such as "I will do ● ●," it is a duty, and if it is written in a decisive tone such as "I will make efforts in ● ●," it is a duty to make efforts.
  • The Institute for Human Centered Design (hereinafter referred to as "HCD-Net") and the Association for Measures against Dark Patterns have discussed that the governance system itself needs to be examined because there is a limit to the examination of what can be seen as a phenomenon in the investigation and examination method of dark patterns. We consider that a governance system for security, usability, and accessibility is necessary. As the guidelines are developed in the future, will the guidelines include how governance should be when considering measures linked with other ministries, agencies, and local governments?
  • As for dark patterns, it is unlikely that the administration has a malicious dark pattern. Therefore, we believe that governance measures are necessary, such as how to incorporate external observations on how to deal with cases where a dark pattern results. It is considered sufficient if there is a reference to actively prevent dark patterns in "2.1 Service Design and Ethics" of the Usability Introduction Guidebook.
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) As a whole, we would like to include governance and management in service design. The first draft of the usability guideline included governance, but it was decided not to include it in this guideline because it has a large scope of influence and the DS-100 series of the Digital Society Promotion Standard Guideline specifies how to proceed with the project. Regarding system development, rather than establishing guidelines and having each ministry and agency follow them, a team will be established in Digital Agency to collectively manage them over the PJMO and PMO of each ministry and agency, and measures to penetrate service design, usability, and measures to prevent dark patterns will be tested prior to the guidelines.
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) Dark patterns are described in the usability introduction guidebook, but how to write prevention measures as a guideline is still in the examination stage. We would like to create it while referring to the guidelines and rules of dark patterns such as HCD-Net.

2. Collection of opinions on the guideline revision policy, 3. Collection of opinions on each group's opinions

*Contains utterances for each document under development.

Overall Guidelines
  • Because of the large volume and number of documents, it would be easier to read and understand if there were a guide to the overall structure, such as which document covers what scope, and which person in charge of which work should read which part.
  • There is a gap between what the title suggests and what the book is actually about.
  • It would be better to clarify the difference between guidelines and guidebooks, the positioning of normative and informative, and the difference between duty and duty to make efforts.
  • It is recommended that the target of each document be clearly stated. It is easier to understand if there are specific examples and illustrations in the document for policymakers. If it is dealt with in writing, it is recommended to supplement it with checklists, etc. to reduce misinterpretation and omissions.
  • The contents of these guidelines are important as they will become the standard process for usability and accessibility in Japan. Please be aware that the contents will be in line with international standards.
  • While we understand that it is necessary to be consistent with the guidelines established in the past, we are concerned that it may be too close to local customs. This initiative will also have an impact on the service design of companies, and I would like you to include the perspective of whether it can be a guideline to build a competitive advantage in the global market. Design in companies can exist not only with design, but also with business and technology, and the point is whether it is described while taking a balance.
  • Instead of conforming to ISO, Japan should propose ISO.
  • Instead of using a document format, I think it would be more efficient and productive if it was written as a program that was all learned by a AI, which would save people the trouble of reading it.
  • I think that the next task of Digital Agency is to challenge the reform of working styles and the reform of the use of design by utilizing technology. It would be good to discuss this point as well.
  • It would be better to have guidelines, a guidebook with prerequisite information, and an easy-to-understand checklist, AI supporter, etc., because many people will not be able to follow the guidelines.
  • The current guidelines refer to AI to some extent, but there is a possibility that the provision of AI friendly content and information will be required in the future, and there is room for considering these points. There are ministries and agencies that are not sufficient in the way the committee provides information. It is also possible to associate areas that cannot be covered by simple search with AI.
  • It covers what is needed overall, but would be better if we included a bit more of the minority perspective.
  • I think that it will be used more appropriately if you are aware of the reason for the explanation, such as why the response is appropriate or why it is not appropriate to take only that response. In particular, regarding obligations, if it is only described as "to do ● ●", it may not be considered that it is sufficient to do only that, and as a result, there is a possibility that it will be a wrong interpretation and an inappropriate response.
  • It is better to use words and expressions that match the literacy of the intended audience. When a technical term is used, it does not mean that you do not understand the term, but that you do not understand it because it is difficult as a whole. Consideration should be given to the use of technical terms.
User Research Guidelines
  • The title and content do not match.
  • It would be better to use a title that makes it clear that the overall content is written, such as a guideline for the summary of user research implementation.
  • If you specifically want to talk about doing research "safely," you might want to put a keyword in the title of the guideline.
  • Information seems to be limited in consideration of informants. In other services, some services are used by people who want to use them, but it seems to be written for systems in which some people have to use the assumed service in "digital society where no one left behind".
  • It can be read as a guideline for conducting user research "safely" in "1.2 Background and issues" / "1.3 Target readers", but I think it would be better to explain the flow such as "Research is important, research must be conducted appropriately, and ensuring safety is especially important". I think it would be good to describe the target readers as "Users who conduct user research". In addition, I felt that it would be good to talk about bias as far as research in general is concerned, and that there should be elements such as paying attention to behavioral characteristics and physical characteristics in children.
  • I think it is important to talk about "what kind of research should be done when", but I felt that it was difficult to use because it was not mentioned. It would be good if there was an explanation of what the goal is to know and when it should be done, how to make a hypothesis, when research should be done and when it is not necessary to do it.
  • If other guidelines are to be referred to regarding when to conduct research, I would be concerned if there is coordination between the guidelines.
  • 2.3 Regarding the explanation of research, it says, "It refers to an activity in which. informants are allocated to one or more interventions in a forward-looking manner." This does not mean that the activity of allocation = research. I think the explanation is insufficient.
  • In "2.4.1 Requirements for Establishment of Consent" to "2.4.3 Omission of Consent in Writing," it is not a definition of terms but an explanation of requirements. I feel that it would be easier to understand if it is explained in Chapter 5.
  • Regarding "2.4.2 Measures for Persons Requiring Special Consideration," there is room for improvement in the following three points.
    • (1) The phrase "may be susceptible to coercion or undue influence" is vague and subjective, and may be interpreted differently by different readers. It may also give the impression that the subject is lumped together as a vulnerable person.
    • ② The list of targets seems to emphasize specific attributes and disregard individual backgrounds and situations. It also gives the impression that other possibilities are excluded.
    • ③ Regarding the "Measures to Protect Rights and Welfare," the necessity of protection is mentioned, but concrete guidelines on what kind of measures are necessary are lacking. It is difficult for readers to understand what to do.
  • 2.4.3 It is unclear which expressions "Consent 1" and "Consent 1-a" refer to as there are no such expressions prior to them.
  • "3.1 Three Principles of Research" states "to be helpful for informants," but it is difficult to understand what they are trying to say, so it would be better to include specific descriptions.
  • Regarding "3.1 Three Principles of Research," there is room for improvement in the following three points.
    • (1) Strengthening of Justice: It is important to appropriately reflect the diversity of the target audience in research principles that advocate fairness. If there is a lack of minority perspectives, there is a risk that research results will be biased toward a certain majority and that measures and services will be unequal for some people.
    • (ii) Ensuring neutrality of research to prevent bias: Considering the representation of minorities is effective as a means to maintain neutrality. It is necessary to ensure diversity in the selection of target subjects and to collect data that is not biased toward any specific group.
    • ③ Improving the reliability of administrative services: Research that reflects the viewpoints of minorities makes diverse people feel that "the administration is listening to them" and has the effect of increasing the reliability and acceptability of the entire service.
  • There is a sense of incongruity in the fact that "3.2 Provision of prototypes" is placed under "3 Ethical principles of research." Since it seems to be a matter of scope rather than ethics, it should be described in the scope of 1.3 or 2 terms / 2.3 research.
  • If the three items listed in "4.1 Items to be implemented" can be linked to the three ethical principles on a one to-one basis, it would be easier to understand if they were linked.
  • Regarding the chapter title of "5. Informed Consent," I think the English meaning is correct, but as the wording evokes consent in medical practice, I feel that a Japanese expression such as "user understanding and consent" rather than katakana will convey the message without misunderstanding.
  • There should be an explanation of the term "rapport formation" in 5.3.
Usability Guidelines
  • I feel that the process of how to evaluate and deal with it to ensure usability is weak. It would be better to include the content of evaluation and improvement before release, including accessibility check.
  • As a guideline for ordering parties, it is necessary to mention the process of acceptance inspection. For usability, tests are required in CIF (Common Industry Format for Usability). If the check at the acceptance inspection stage is not mentioned for not only usability but also accessibility, it may result in minimum implementation or non-implementation.
  • Regarding the acceptance inspection, I think that if the common points of what is expected of the people involved in the work and what should be confirmed are specified, there will be fewer problems in the operation. I felt that it is difficult to read and understand the usage of terms and the contents at present.
  • Since you will be running two different tasks in Usability and Accessibility, it would be good if there is a clear description of what to do in each.
  • I think we have no choice but to mention governance and organizational structure. If each ministry has an information system division and there is no suggestion on how to operate and manage usability, it will be difficult to understand and we may end up not doing it.
  • One of the difficulties of usability in procurement is that it is difficult to indicate the image of actual interaction at the stage of ordering. What to do about this is an issue.
  • With regard to the fail-safe and foolproof described in "4.2 Planning and Implementation of Measures," there are two types of problems. One is the problem that can be solved by replacement when ensuring usability, and the other is the problem that requires ideas and cannot be solved without creative jump. Since it is not something that can be easily done by administrative officials, it is necessary for experts to deal with it. It would be good if examples of what can be easily imagined among them, the development process when fail-safe and foolproof are applied, and what insights can be used to make it possible, etc. were mentioned. Since this is a highly specialized topic, it may be included in the guidebook.
  • As it is difficult to understand "3.1.2 Identification of accessibility needs" even if I read the "Guidebook for Introducing Web Accessibility," it would be easier to understand if specific examples are given here, for example, by specifying the evaluation method.
  • There are many "assumptions" such as "terminal to be used," "sensory modality," and "user characteristics." There seems to be a lack of guidelines on how to specify them. In addition, it is important to incorporate the perspectives of persons with disabilities and other relevant parties into projects in order to improve accessibility. We would like to see the participation of relevant parties included in this wording.
  • I think the use of the term "use error" is a bit sloppy, and I want to make it clear because it's an important concept.
  • Regarding the description of "2.1.1 Use Error," it is not clear whether it is a case in which someone in each ministry and agency is operating the information system or a case in which citizens are using the service.
  • I would like to know the source of the figures quoted in "1.2 Background and issues."
  • Regarding "3.2.1 Implementation of Fact-Finding Survey (Design Research)," I have doubts about the usage of the term. Design research often covers a wide range of services as a whole, but here it refers to confirmation of the status of devices and touchpoints, etc. People have an image that design research is difficult.
  • Regarding usability, designers in charge of planning activities and people related to software refer to the standards, respectively. The term "usage quality" appears suddenly and seems to be mixed with usability. Therefore, it is better to use the same term.
Usability Introduction Guidebook
  • The book is voluminous and informative, but it needs to be easy to read and easy to get to know. For example, it would be better to increase the number of illustrations and examples, to make it possible to read the book as needed without having to read the whole book, and to divide the book into sections that should be read and sections for those who want to read it.
  • The "Two Principles" seem to vary in level, but the content is interesting. It would be better to include references for those who want more information.
  • It is better to mention dark patterns in "2.1 Service Design and Ethics." I don't think it is assumed that malicious dark patterns will be introduced in the government. However, dark pattern design may result due to the lack of consideration of the designer, the desire to obtain user information, or the desire to have the user write information. Users may have unintended results, and it is starting to become a social problem, so it is better to mention the dark patterns that result.
  • In "2.2 Principles of Usability Design", accessibility first, the principle of dialogue, the principle of information presentation, and the principle of human-centered are mentioned. However, I feel that dialogue and information presentation are difficult to see in the overall structure. Since it is difficult to change the structure, it would be better if they could be dealt with in the table of contents and illustrations.
  • In HCD-Net, the term "human-centered design" is used instead of "human-centered design" in "3.1 Human-centered design." Please consider using the term "human-centered design" instead of "human-centered design" so that the wording does not become rigid or look too much like engineering.
  • The SQuaRE series (ISO/IEC 250 xx) is mentioned in "3.3.1 Adaptation to Issues in Individual Activities and Management," but it is an unfamiliar term for someone from a Web-oriented background.
Accessibility in general
  • There are references to accessibility in various passages, and there is a risk of incomplete function as' don'ts.'
  • I feel that covering specific references within the design system and clarifying what can and cannot be done within the design system will make it easier for each ministry and agency to consider.
  • Regarding accessibility and the interests of minorities, I would like to see issues such as what the people involved think, what is inconvenient, and what can be done to improve it. There is an increasing number of cases in which engineers, developers, and designers say, "This is something that should be done" without the people involved talking about accessibility. I would like to aim for a form that avoids such cases as much as possible.
Web Accessibility Introduction Guidebook
  • Sign language should be added to "3.3 Matters to be confirmed depending on the situation (individual response)" as one of the alternative content for the following reasons.
    • (1) Sign language is a language and a means to reduce cognitive load
    • ② Realization of highly accessible information provision
    • ③ Improvement of accessibility as a responsibility of public institutions
    • ④ Meeting the needs of the hearing impaired
    • Development and dissemination of standards through repeated practice
  • Regarding "4. Process for Implementing Web Accessibility," "Significance of Diverse Users Participating in the Process" should be added. If the perspectives of minorities in society are lacking, only the needs of the majority will be prioritized, which may lead to unequal results. Therefore, it is necessary to target people with diverse backgrounds in research and to consider that they have opportunities to have their opinions appropriately reflected. Specifically, "Significance of Diverse Users Participating in the Process" should be added after "4. 1 Service Development in Information Systems."
Guidebook for Publicizing Web Accessibility
  • In "1.1 Background and issues," there is an example of a case where a video with subtitles is released later than a video without subtitles. It is better to describe this point as a corresponding matter in the text.
  • For policy-makers and others who have a strong visual tendency rather than a linguistic tendency, illustrations and specific examples are easier to understand.
  • In "2.1 User Characteristics," the user environments that need to be considered are listed. However, I felt that it is difficult to understand why consideration is necessary and what should be considered in the current explanation. It would be better to explain a little more specific examples such as why they are in trouble.
  • Since this is an introductory guidebook, I think the contents are for beginners. However, since the terminology is difficult, there are some parts that beginners cannot understand, so it is better to add an explanation.
  • Regarding "Audio Guide" on P. 9, it is better to briefly explain that it is different from general narration. There is an explanation of "Audio Explanation" on P. 33 of the introduction guidebook and "Audio Guide (Audio Explanation)" on P. 34 of this guidebook. However, it is better to read it with the same understanding at the beginning. In addition, since the terminology is different, it is better to use the same notation.
  • P. 28 It seems that there is no explanation of "closed captions" anywhere, including in the introduction guidebook. A definition or explanation of terms should be provided.
Design system
  • It would be easier to understand if there are explanations of the reasons and specific examples. For example, regarding ensuring the readability and visibility of typography fonts, the numbers 3 and 8, and katakana (pa and ba) look the same.
Web Content Guidelines
  • Both the Web Content Guideline and the Website Guideline seem to be acceptable.
  • While we understand that it is necessary to be consistent with the guidelines established in the past, we are concerned that it may be too closed to local customs. We would like you to include the viewpoint of whether it can be a guideline to build a competitive advantage in the global market.
  • In "9.3.3 Gender and Sexuality," it says, "Unless there is a rational necessity, we will not obtain information about gender through questionnaires, etc.," but I felt that it would be good to have an example of how to respond when there is a necessity to obtain information. Since this is described in the UI checklist, it would be easier to understand if it is also provided here.
  • The "15 Life-Cycle Management of Public Information" describes the life-cycle of Web content. I would like to see the content remain in the Web space, and I would like to see the Web designed so that it remains.
  • There is a tendency to exclude non-certified operating systems and browsers and encourage the installation of certified operating systems and browsers. This is related to accessibility, and there are people who usually use the web with a screen reader or an extended function, or people who are elderly and cannot use anything other than what they are used to. Therefore, please do not exclude non-certified operating systems and browsers.
  • There is a tendency that the responsibility is fulfilled as long as the correct information is posted on the administrative website, and it is the responsibility of the reader. I feel that it is necessary to present an awareness of the problem that too much information is read and not all of it is read, and that it is difficult to find where the information is. It is necessary to mention the trade-off that accuracy requires precision and it becomes difficult to understand, and that appropriate logic is necessary because in many cases the web exists but the logic to the information is not presented.
  • Since there are many users of the government system, it is important to use what kind of voice and tone to convey to the users as a whole. It would be better to include a description that it is better for administrative officers to implement UX writing because they can expect effects if they understand the basics of UX writing.
Guidelines for Provision and Promotion of Use of Administrative Information through Websites, etc.
  • Promotion of use is a necessary point of view. These guidelines are intended for the maintenance and disclosure of administrative information. However, it would be interesting to discuss whether it is possible to promote the use of administrative information in ways other than initiatives and guidelines that promote the use of administrative information by citizens and the granting of points according to use.
  • If the information is provided in PDF, it will be difficult to handle from the viewpoint of accessibility and information reusability. If it is in the form of text such as markup, the reusability of the information will increase. Therefore, I would like to say that "markup information disclosure is necessary instead of PDF". Whether it will be handled or not should be judged based on whether it is in line with Digital Agency's policies.