<html><head></head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" data-blackberry-caret-color="#00a8df" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: initial;"><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Dear Paul</div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br></div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">I support everything you say below. </div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><br></div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Thanks </div><div style="width: 100%; font-size: initial; font-family: Calibri, 'Slate Pro', sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); text-align: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Crispin </div><div id="_originalContent" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div>
<br>
2. My professional career as a university professor including
teaching cartography (mapping), in which symbols and graphics were
much emphasized. We want our graphics about stoves to be useful
and accurate. Some pointers which are MY thoughts and are not
standardized anywhere:<br>
<br>
a. The spider graph is very appropriate. Do a Google search of
spider graph and see a few dozen examples. <br>
<br>
b. the outer edge (perimeter) is probably best for the most
favorable reading because it is more difficult to read the values
that are all in close to the center. And we assume that many
stoves will eventually get in close to the center.<br>
<br>
c. ALL of the scales should increase IN DESIRABILITY from the
center toward the periphery. That means that low CO emissions
(0.0) is at the edge and absurdly high is in the center. And
efficiency numbers are high at the edge and zero at the center.
Otherwise the visual clarity of "goodness" is jumping into the
center and back out again with each different variable.<br>
<br>
d. There is no need for the same "scale" to be along each radial
line. Some are integral numeric. Others can be rankings as
numbers, and some could be in a word scale (but should at least
have ordinal ranking). <br>
<br>
e. Crispin gave a great list of variables
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="color:black">Social science
metrics include preferences, fuels, controllability,
lighting time, ease of learning to use it, appearance,
comparison with other products such as traditional stoves or
competing improved stoves, working life, ease of
maintenance, ability to accommodate a range of pots or
multiple pots, price, installation cost, transport to the
home issues, attention demand, fuel preparation requirement,
safety concerns, space heating, light casting, clothes
drying ability, fuel drying ability, thermal mass heat
storage, fuel flexibility and many others relating to
opinions of users or observers. Perception of modernity is
another.</span></p>
</blockquote>
Plus there are the physical science metrics whether measured in
the Lab or in the Field (therefore TWO sets for each), and we hope
that they are similar results, but the spider graph would help
point out the differences.<br>
<br>
3. To make this all useful for evaluation of stoves, we really
need some efforts and some examples and much discussion. It will
take a while to get something (multiple things) established.<br>
<br>
Paul‎<br></div><!--end of _originalContent --></div></body></html>