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 ".

3rd Review Meeting for Revision of Service Design Guidelines

Last Updated:

Overview

Date and

January 21, 2025 (Tuesday) 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

US>

Online meetings

Agenda

  1. Explanation of the applicable guidelines
  2. Collection of opinions
  3. Closing Remarks

Material

References

  • Reference: "Status of Consideration of Service Design Related Guidelines" * Limited to 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.)

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)

No questions asked.

2. Discussion on the Guidelines

Comments on the Status of Consideration of Service Design Guidelines (Supplement)

*Contains utterances for each document under development.

  • In terms of the position of these guidelines and guidebooks in the framework of service design, it would be good if the overall picture could be organized in an easy-to-understand manner. It would also be good if the differences between the guidelines and guidebooks and the differences between normative and informative could be shown in the overall picture. It would also be good if the overall picture were organized in a list in a way that users could understand the usage scenes, purpose, etc. of each document from their perspective.
  • It would be better if the service design guideline group as a whole clearly states the scope and positioning of service design and what it aims for.
  • Since the guidelines are voluminous, it would be helpful if the guidelines were clarified, including where to start reading and where to refer to in the project you are involved in.
  • Regarding checklists, the UI checklist is specific, while the accessibility checklist is simple. For many people, the checklist will be the first entry point and may be perceived as sufficient. Therefore, the accessibility checklist should be a simple check and a detailed check.
  • Use of the Usability Guidelines It is difficult to set quality goals without expertise. It would be good if there is a supplement on the concept of setting goals and points to note.
  • For example, similar information such as the calculation method of resident tax is posted on the website of each local government, but it is desirable to provide a consistent URL on the website of the central government and link to it from each local government so that it is easy to understand what is correct information.
  • As a specific example of a dark pattern, an example of consent of personal information was mentioned in today's explanation. I would like you to introduce it as an example in the document. It would be good to have an example of what can be a dark pattern.
  • It is recommended that the Guidebook for Introducing Web Accessible Language include the use of sign language as a supplement to the spoken portion of the video as reference information. Since there are no parties involved in sign language interpretation and translation at WCAG, there are many misunderstandings. We plan to take this opportunity to give our opinions to WCAG. We are grateful that this is a more advanced example than other countries.
  • The current situation is that sign language interpretation requires specialized skills, so the only way to get sign language for video is to ask a sign language interpretation center. The hurdles to implementation are high, and if it is an option, it will be done or not done, so it is necessary to raise the priority and promote it with strong words.
  • Research ethics are coming under increasing pressure at universities, and the Human-Centered Design Initiative is discussing the possibility of requiring ethical reviews when companies conduct design research and usability testing. Ethical reviews may also be required for user research and usability testing in Digital Agency, and the situation needs to be monitored closely.
  • As for ethics, there should be ethical review in academia, but it is difficult even for companies to establish a system for ethical review. Regarding review, it is possible to create exceptions based on a certain level of standards, rather than making all responses mandatory. It would be good if it could be incorporated into the guidelines.
  • By using AI as a knowledge-base for a comprehensive knowledge-system, errors can be reduced without depending on individuals. Since Digital Agency's documents are structured, I think they can be read into AI and used as logic, and I think it would be good to consider machine-readable guidelines.
  • It may be a good idea to evaluate using AI such as the uniformity of notation and documents. Although the service design guidelines have been standardized, it may be a good idea to evaluate the notation in comparison with other documents.
  • The Government of Japan requests the Government of the United States to correctly describe the wording of documents issued by Ministries and Agencies in Japanese. For example, with regard to the wording of the Guidelines, the Government of Japan requests the Government of the United States to correctly describe the wording of paragraphs in Japanese, such as
  • Regarding the scope of the guidelines to be developed this term, we are concerned about the use of the term, as it may create a gap between the use of the term product design and the image held by people in the design field.
  • There should be a note about the translation of the classification name of DS-67x. Since DS-68x is described as "Content Design / Communication Design", I think that such description is acceptable.
  • Regarding the scope of application of the Web Content Guideline, it is stated that "it shall be applied at the time of revision." However, since the expression "revision" gives the impression that it is an improvement on what has already been released, it is necessary to supplement and clarify the words so as not to cause misunderstanding.
  • I would like to see the inclusion of the phrase "gathering opinions from a diverse range of users at the initial stage" in the Usability Guidelines "1.2 Background and Issues." This will make it possible to grasp specific issues and barriers in usage scenarios of systems and services at an early stage and incorporate solutions at the design stage, which will ultimately lead to improved usability.
  • Regarding the "4.1.2 Risk Management" of the Usability Guidelines, it is ambiguous how to utilize the feedback of related parties and users. Therefore, it is better to supplement it with a specific flow regarding the process of cooperation with users and risk assessment.
  • In "3.2.5 Achievement Evaluation Method" of the Usability Guidelines, methods such as "Usability Test" and "Heuristic Evaluation" are mentioned, but the details of how to implement them are insufficient. It is better to include simple procedures and links to reference materials. For example, it is recommended to include "In addition to heuristic evaluation by experts, usability test including actual users is recommended."
  • The Usability Introduction Guidebook "1.2 Background and Issues" should fully emphasize the importance of collecting diverse user opinions at the initial stage. Collecting diverse opinions at the initial stage will have the effect of suppressing cost increases and usability defects due to modifications in the post-process and will also lead to "5.1 Ensuring Diversity (Representation)".
  • Regarding the usability introduction guidebook "2.1.2 Users," the image of users is concrete, but there is not enough reference to users with special needs such as the disabled and the elderly. From the perspective of inclusive design, it is better to make it possible to clearly assume various users.
  • In "5.1 Ensuring Diversity (Representation)," a guidebook for introducing usability, the expressions "auditing" and "fostering social trust" suddenly appear, making it difficult for readers to understand their necessity and significance. Therefore, it would be better to include supplementary explanations with specific examples. In addition, although the concept of "representation" is presented, it would be difficult for readers to have an image of how to realize it. Therefore, it would be better to have specific methods and examples.
  • Regarding the "Cases in which video is included" in the accessibility checklist, it is advisable to include the addition of sign language to the audio in video as reference information. Although WCAG considers sign language support to be the AAA-standard, the number of municipalities that have established sign language ordinance is increasing, and cases in which sign language is incorporated are also expanding. I would like you to consider adding it as an option in anticipation of its use in public institutions and local governments.
  • Regarding the statement on page 24 of the Guide for Public Relations on Web Accessibility, "It is recommended to secure workers to revise the transcript in real time if possible," it is better to use "as much as possible in consideration of practicality and to prevent misunderstanding that it is not necessary," instead of "if possible," because it is the default not to do so at present.
  • "Sign language interpretation" in pages 15-16, 20, and 24 of the Guidebook for Web Accessibility Publicity should be referred to as "sign language," following the example of WCAG. Sign language interpretation means the expression of sign language on the spot, and it has a different meaning from sign language translation, which takes time to prepare sign language expression. It is better to use "sign language" here because it is better to include both meanings.
  • It is necessary to add a note at the end of page 25 of the Guidebook for Web Accessibility PR that the sign language interpretation and subtitles provided in real time should not be used as they are when delivering archives or creating reports.
  • It is necessary to correct the description about the use of sign language on page 29 of the Guidebook for Publicity Regarding Web Accessibility. The distinction is not clear in WCAG2.0. It is necessary to distinguish between a sign language translator who takes time to prepare a sign language expression and a sign language interpreter who expresses a sign language on the spot.
  • Regarding the description of sign language on page 35 of the Guide for Web Accessibility Publicity, it is necessary to add a description of the contrast ratio and visibility of the entire image.
Expectations for the next fiscal year
  • Regarding the service design to be covered in the next term and after, it would be good if the position of the Digital Agency could be clarified because the scope of the term is wide, and what should be described in the guidelines could be specified.
  • I think that the service design guidelines for the next term will include some kind of design principles, and I would like to consider what kind of things should be included in them.
  • As the amount of guidelines increases, it will be difficult to find the necessary information, so the flow of what content each person in charge needs to refer to is also important, so I would like you to design it well. As the readers of each document come into view, the wording and volume will become realistic. The people in charge of creating the UI will be able to accept it more easily if there are many figures and examples. I think that the implementation rate will increase if you can add a mechanism to make the readers accept it.
  • Digital Agency's design system and guidebook have attracted attention not only from the government but also from the private sector, which refers to them as standards. Once these documents are made public, we would like to use them in our own training, etc.
  • I think there will be cases where people on the ground will not be able to respond to the content of the guidelines due to a lack of time and budget. It would be good to consider how to proceed with the project well and how to put it into practice.
  • Accumulating and sharing examples of the use of the guidelines among ministries and agencies will deepen understanding. Although it may be difficult to disclose them to the public, it is useful to widely disclose examples, so I would like you to consider disseminating information.
  • It is important for people in the field, such as engineers and designers, to be able to feel that the guidelines and guidebooks have been actually used and digital administration has been improved. I would like to see model cases of the guidelines being put into practice, how the guidelines are being used, and how they have changed based on the initial assumptions based on the guidelines. If people can feel that what has been created has improved, I think there will be a common recognition of points that should be taken.
  • It may be necessary to provide operational training on how to use the guidelines. In practice, the guidelines may need to be applied to the formulation of specifications and day-to-day operations, which may involve quality issues. In addition, it is better to consider the application of the guidelines to local governments because the application not only to the national government but also to local governments will lead to the popularization of the guidelines throughout the country.
  • This guideline focuses on the web such as JIS 8341-3 and WCAG, but the relationship with the part related to the software as a whole such as JIS 8341-6 is not seen. It is necessary to consider how to think about the direction of Digital Agency as an overall accessibility in the future.
  • In Europe and the United States, there are laws and standards as overseas standards, but in Asia, the systems are insufficient. It would be good if Japan could show well what it conforms to and what it is based on. For example, it would be good to create a JIS based on JIS 8341-1 that would match the standards of Europe and the United States, and finally make it ISO.

3. Compilation of Results

  • It was very good that the entire system of service design guidelines was organized and several specific guidelines and guidebooks were created within it. I think it is important that such documents exist and that Digital Agency issues them, and that they remain as resources that can be accessed by many people.
  • It is significant that this guideline is issued by Digital Agency. Many readers may feel that it is highly reliable, so it is good to take this opportunity to advance the bottom-up of Japanese digital design.
  • Government agencies, local governments, and private companies are at odds over how far accessibility should be considered. By documenting the national policy, we can create a standard for Japan as a whole. It is good that a systematic document is created through discussions not only on accessibility. I feel that the publication of such a document from Japan will be referenced from all over the world, and I think it is a significant project.
  • The digital field is a rapidly changing industry with new technologies coming out one after another, so the next challenge is how to keep up with the guidelines and how to coexist with the bureaucratic documentation method and the rapidly changing digital field.
  • After the guidelines are made, the next important point is how to use them and how to make them understood. Also, I think there will be a struggle over how far to go. It would be wasteful if people say, "It's OK to go this far, and it's OK not to go any further." It would be good if we could discuss how to make them use the guidelines in a way that they can take a step further.
  • This is the starting point from which the guidelines will be revised if they are actually used and good results are achieved or if good results are not achieved. The future will be more important.
  • We have no choice but to use digital technology, such as AI, to maintain and improve production efficiency in terms of volume and what is written where. I think it will be advanced if Digital Agency designs digital ways of working in which humans and AI collaborate in various fields and announces them to each ministry and society.
  • It is important to compile them not only in PDF format but also in data format that can be used, including AI, and to see how to use them in conjunction with training.
  • Regarding the service design for the next fiscal year, if the scope is too broad, such as administration × design, the design of the policy itself, and whether or not non-digital services are included, it will be difficult to break it down into concrete guidelines. Therefore, it is important for each Digital Agency to identify which areas to promote. There is no absolute right one, and it is good to decide the scope of service design for each Digital Agency.
  • The term "service design" has its characteristics in the way it is used in regions and markets. If we can discuss the scope as a Digital Agency and what is outside it, I think the utilization of design will advance in the Japanese government.
  • It is likely that the discussion of quality management and organizational strategies will be outside the context of the current situation in Digital Agency. In doing so, the ideas and philosophy that will be the foundation will be important, so it is good to proceed with a framework that does not bend even if it protrudes, while securing those things.
  • I think that private companies will feel that quality during use is important from the perspective of quality during use.
  • These Guidelines are an ambitious attempt to realize a society in which diverse users can enjoy services equally. Improving accessibility is an important effort to build a foundation for services that are easy to use for all, and it will become more effective through continuous discussion and exchange of opinions among diverse members. I expect that discussions with various viewpoints will continue to deepen.
  • With regard to the opinion that it is necessary to collect opinions from various users at the initial stage, it would be good if this guideline could take into account the fact that the CIF usage status description describes how various user groups use it.
  • It was good that we were able to hear opinions from people with various backgrounds. The opinions from the review meeting were reflected more than expected, and I think it was a very epoch-making initiative.
  • It was helpful to learn about the concept and system of the Study Group for the 2nd Revision of the Service Design Guidelines, which emphasizes the ease of consultation and the presence of experts in the Digital Agency. I would like to know more about the details.