Starting point: training as part of the interface
Framing the question for the course — why bridge training tends to sit outside the interface, and what it would mean to bring it inside.
- OpenBridge
- framing
- training
Bridge interfaces are learned in three places, none of them the interface itself: a simulator, a manual, or a colleague standing over your shoulder. Each works, and each has the same weakness — the knowledge lives somewhere other than where the work happens.
OpenBridge makes a strong case that consistency across vendors is a design problem worth solving centrally. My question for this course is whether learnability deserves the same treatment.
What I want to find out
- Where operators currently get stuck, and whether those moments are predictable enough to design for.
- What a design system can legitimately specify about learning, as opposed to what has to be left to training programmes.
- Which existing patterns — onboarding, progressive disclosure, guided modes — survive contact with a safety-critical bridge context, and which do not.
How I will work
Entries here are written as the work happens. Sources go in the research library with the findings I want to keep. I expect the framing above to change; when it does, I will write a new entry rather than edit this one.