| the optimism of consistently printing (or stitching!) symbols with this level of detail across fabric types, from printed tags to printed on-fabric to stitched tags, that will also remain readable after frequent wear and cleaning ignoring the existing multiplicity of existing standards (ISO vs. ASTM vs. GINETEX vs. Japan vs. OTEXA/CGSB/Canada) to propose another one, especially when many of the changes he makes were at one point implemented in a non-English-speaking nation for decades[1] and then abandoned for the international standard that he doesn't like redesigning all future clothing to use a new standard that can be confused or conflict with existing standards that will remain in use for decades because no older non-compliant clothing will be immediately destroyed, much less all missing more actionable user-focused solutions that don't require a new standard, such as adding standardized, well-designed, localized symbol keys on points of interaction, like laundry supplies and equipment all leading to a point not of action but to "bring more awareness to the cost" of something the author and his immediate audience personally does not understand, but which is not necessarily broadly misunderstood and for that matter is only believed by the author to be broadly misunderstood because of an out-of-context, entertaining blog post[2] where, for mildly career-connected fun and LinkedIn social engagement, the researcher texted her mom and some personal friends and came to a half-joking conclusion appropriate to the post's mostly unserious tone ("I am predictably going to advocate more user research on the matter") that's neither mentioned nor applied by the author [1] https://www.sbs-zipper.com/blog/japan-implements-new-clothin... [2] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/speed-user-research-question-... |