<story><title>Share: The Icon No One Agrees On</title><url>https://bold.pixelapse.com/minming/share-the-icon-no-one-agrees-on</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ggchappell</author><text>The problem that comes before this one is whether &lt;i&gt;share&lt;/i&gt; is a well-understood action.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via e-mail, then I &lt;i&gt;transmit&lt;/i&gt; a document to others. After this, each recipient has a separate copy which, thereafter, is completely out of my control.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via social network, then I &lt;i&gt;upload&lt;/i&gt; a document. This makes a single copy, accessible to previously chosen people. It is (depending on the social network) somewhat under my control. Others can comment on it.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via something like Dropbox, then I make the document &lt;i&gt;accessible&lt;/i&gt; to others. No copy is made. If I share via URL, then I give read access. If I make a shared folder, then I give both read and write access.&lt;p&gt;Now, we techies know these are different things. Our mental model of non-technical users&amp;#x27; thinking might suggest that, &lt;i&gt;to them&lt;/i&gt;, these are all the same kind of action.&lt;p&gt;But are they?&lt;p&gt;Does an average non-technical user think of folder sharing, Facebook posts, and e-mail messages as the same category of action? I&amp;#x27;m not sure he does.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>joshuak</author><text>Non-technical users have always understood the concepts of: publish (or broadcast), share (or collaborate), and give (or send).&lt;p&gt;The computer world is the one that limited these concepts.&lt;p&gt;Before web: you can only copy and give.&lt;p&gt;After web: you can give, or publish.&lt;p&gt;After cloud: you can give, publish, and share.&lt;p&gt;I think these concepts should be as well differentiated in the digital world as they are in the physical.</text></comment>
<story><title>Share: The Icon No One Agrees On</title><url>https://bold.pixelapse.com/minming/share-the-icon-no-one-agrees-on</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ggchappell</author><text>The problem that comes before this one is whether &lt;i&gt;share&lt;/i&gt; is a well-understood action.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via e-mail, then I &lt;i&gt;transmit&lt;/i&gt; a document to others. After this, each recipient has a separate copy which, thereafter, is completely out of my control.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via social network, then I &lt;i&gt;upload&lt;/i&gt; a document. This makes a single copy, accessible to previously chosen people. It is (depending on the social network) somewhat under my control. Others can comment on it.&lt;p&gt;If I &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; via something like Dropbox, then I make the document &lt;i&gt;accessible&lt;/i&gt; to others. No copy is made. If I share via URL, then I give read access. If I make a shared folder, then I give both read and write access.&lt;p&gt;Now, we techies know these are different things. Our mental model of non-technical users&amp;#x27; thinking might suggest that, &lt;i&gt;to them&lt;/i&gt;, these are all the same kind of action.&lt;p&gt;But are they?&lt;p&gt;Does an average non-technical user think of folder sharing, Facebook posts, and e-mail messages as the same category of action? I&amp;#x27;m not sure he does.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>x0054</author><text>Perhaps its more logical to refer to all of these types of action as &amp;quot;broadcast&amp;quot; rather than &amp;quot;share&amp;quot; actions. You are &amp;quot;broadcasting&amp;quot; a picture to facebook, or a link to the file via twitter, or the actual file via email. By referring to these actions as broadcast rather than share actions, you convey to the user that they are relinquishing power over that data, once the genie is out, you are not stuffing him back in. A good icon would be a radio antenna broadcasting things. Just a thought.</text></comment>