KOSOVO / THE PUBLICATION ROOM
Make the directory’s scope visible to the person using it.
Public collections of organisations, resources or initiatives.
Inclusion is an editorial decision.
A directory can look authoritative even when it is only a project team’s selection. We help make its purpose and inclusion criteria clear. Listing an organisation should not imply accreditation, endorsement or comprehensive coverage unless the owner can substantiate that claim.
The useful design work starts with the record: what the directory describes, where the information came from and which details the owner has permission to publish. The team decides whether a submitted correction is accepted. The website can support that review without automatically changing a public listing.
Two organisations with similar names.
In a hypothetical partner directory, two organisations use similar abbreviations. A reader needs enough context to choose the intended record: the full approved name, the organisation’s own website and a relevant description. We would not resolve that ambiguity by appending a guessed location or legal status.
Filters should describe information the collection actually contains. If a record has no confirmed service area, the interface should not quietly classify it as nationwide. We test the distinction between a useful filter and an unsupported claim using real records supplied for the project.
Keep the collection credible over time.
Work can include record templates, search, correction requests, editorial review and a planned periodic review of entries. A public directory and a private membership database have different access and disclosure requirements; they should not become the same dataset by accident.