Sometimes I get jealous about all the fun tech people seem to have, what will their creatin' stuff and problem solvin'. The latest object of my jealousy is a project run by Yahoo called the Design Pattern Library, which houses design patterns intended to "describe[] an optimal solution to a common problem within a specific context." I'm finding myself wondering if it doesn't have some lessons to teach about knowledge sharing in the political world. With the warning that my thoughts on this are still in the formation process, let me suggest why.
The purpose of the Design Pattern Library is simple: to offer up models for good ways of solving user interface challenges on the web. For example, one of the more popular patterns is called Vote to Promote, which is more or less the Digg model. For every pattern in the library, four elements are detailed: title, problem, context, and solutions. When it comes to this voting model, the pattern notes why a developer might want to use the tool and some design considerations, such as the need to build a sizable enough community to make the differences between vote totals meaningful. The pattern also provides notes on how to indicate popularity and to make sure that users have actually read/watched/listened to what they're rating. There's also a discussion of how users might try to game the system, and how to foil those attempts.
Why would Yahoo! give away for free what they've learned about pattern design? To get feedback on their own products from the development community. To improve the web user experience across the board. To establish the company as a great corporate citizen in the online development world. Because working together is more enjoyable than working alone, and the tech world sees value in having fun.
It's not difficult to see that there are "design patterns" when it comes to both campaigns and governing that would be invaluable if shared. But the way things stand now, we're all left to reinvent the wheel time and again. For example, it would help a new candidate a great deal to have access to a pattern on how to approach engaging with the local blogosphere. Every small advocacy group is left to learn on their own how to get access to legislative information. Why don't some of us in the political world take a leadership role in packaging that knowledge for reuse? I think there's arguably no real need for those chunks of know-how to even be restricted along partisan lines. Google developers are free to make use of Yahoo's patterns, and starting to think in terms of shared "design patterns for politics" could raise the level of the game for everyone. (Photo thx xian)
