21 UM Yeah - Exactly.

Perhaps I wasn’t being clear. This notion stems from a process through which I’m undergoing personally. I’m just beginning to articulate what has come to me and it is undoubtedly fuzzy at this point, but it only becomes more clear with each step of exploration.

Over a decade ago, I sought to understand what my place was going to be in this world and I identified myself as “designer.” I studied design. I labeled myself as designer and revered myself as such.

Over the years, I’ve realized the term is misused, overused, and abused. A hobbyist can pick up a book, learn a little something and go forth, create, build, and declare their design. And no one can argue that it isn’t design.

Ah, but craft. “Craft” as it relates to “design” is the beauty side of the same coin. As indicated, design has intention and this may very well be true, but it is the word “craft” that can denote so much more. And so, I would suggest that where design has intention, craft has intuition; designers are industrious, craftsmen (and women) flow.

In my college design courses, the literature taught us that there was function and there was aesthetic. I have found that most people polarize and tend to focus on one or the other in their post-academia careers.

Throughout my career, my position has at countless times been to mitigate in the chasm between the technically proficient and the artistically profound. Perhaps it is design that is the middle where the two meet. Moderately simple mathematics will show us that starting with zero then going in two opposing directions, there is infinity in both directions. Artistry and Industry, running infinitely deep in their respective directions.

So, for me, I need some distinction for this discipline of “creating an experience.” Usability, in its purist sense, is virtually devoid of all aesthetics. Just as pure artistic expression of emotion is is of no mainstream use.

I am by no means suggesting that design should go away. Perhaps I’m suggesting that as human factors, usability, ergonomics, etc. have become such cornerstones to our practice of design, we need see the other side of the coin. And that is where we find craft.

posted at 05:01 am on July 3, 2007 by Chris Pallé

22

Sorry, Chris, I think you’re making stuff up. I think you’re finding divides where none exist.

If you prefer to call yourself a craftsman because the romanticism of the word appeals to you, go for it. But leave the rest of us designers out of it.

posted at 03:44 pm on July 3, 2007 by amber simmons

23 Not Here to Debate

As I said, this is just partly a personal process. The notion is still nebulous. I will still consider myself a designer when the time comes to design. Just as I’ll have to put a purely analytical left-brained hat from time-to-time.

I am not creating divisions or factions. Quite the contrary, actually. I was just looking to explore some areas in the spectrum and seeing if anyone else was interested in the notion.The intent was not to ruffle your feathers – or anyone else’s for that matter – Amber. If your position is to take a stand and speak for “the rest of the designers,” perhaps there’s the cold division.

There is no reason to get defensive. I didn’t come hear to argue or impose ideology. I happened to really enjoy Sharon’s article and it was very timely as I was pondering these notions.

posted at 05:11 pm on July 3, 2007 by Chris Pallé

24 point of view

really enjoyed the article and the many comments. perhaps craft is something that is at once subjective and objective. I’m not a designer but I am an artist to a certain degree. I know what I like but other people make different choices. Craft not always what catches the eye. Sometimes it is in what you don’t see. you can look at a house and admire the structure without ever understanding the craft in building and designing the structure. You can admire a beautiful textile without understanding the mathmatical craft it took. The structure of words is as important to the message as the message itself. So is the tone or other elements in the message. It’s the “objective” to influence the “subjective”

posted at 05:38 pm on July 3, 2007 by patricia pledger

25

Chris, let’s talk offlist?

staranise@gmail.com

posted at 07:51 pm on July 3, 2007 by amber simmons

26 H

“The principles of good human-to-computer interface design are simplicity, support, clarity, encouragement, satisfaction, accessibility, versatility, and personalization.”

Sharon you weave a beautiful statement of your principles. I have been studying design from the perspective of a wonderful old IBMer, John Zachman. I always thought his ideas were dull and mechanical until I read the work of Alan Cooper and a light came on.

According to John there are six focuses in a system:

1. Goal
2. Formal
3. Functional
4. Spatial
5. Temporal
6. Personal

John Zachman is a form centric designer and it fits with his IBM background. The structure of the database guides the entire design. Alan Cooper is a self-professed goal centric designer always thinking about the objective of the users of the system. I would say you are a persona centric designer. You want the user of your sites to come away with a positive personal experience.

There is nothing wrong with these emphases. However, I want to recognize the centrism of other design philosophies and see how they cater to different audiences. A fully balanced design would be boring and serve no one well. I wish you much success in your design pursuits.

posted at 04:52 am on July 4, 2007 by Grant Czerepak

27 Great Article

Hi, I find your article closely relates to a recent research on consumer behaviour online I did for uni last month. Looking forward to read your next article. Thank you!

posted at 09:32 am on July 5, 2007 by Dejan Petrovic

28 Great article, but transparency is not an obvious

May be it´s time to think about the Scolari´s notion of transparency. Everyone is thinking about human and machine, but not too much about human to human. Can I use it as a start of one of my blog posts?. Thanx

posted at 10:20 pm on July 5, 2007 by Martín Parselis

29 Excellent article, though need example(s)

An excellent article that makes one think of how they build their web site. I would just like an example of how one can better the human-to-human interaction.

posted at 03:54 pm on July 7, 2007 by J P

30 There are good points but you can't just imagine y

I believe in increasing the user experience but it is important to talk to your users when possible and do testing as you design the site. Scenarios and use cases are useful, but if you create a rich, engaging experience that no one knows how to use or find you’ve wasted a great deal of time. Substituting one’s own imagination to predict how users will respond is something I’ve done myself and seen a great deal.

I would have really like to have seen something about testing designs and changes made before the site is completely programmed. Interviewing, getting feedback, and actually seeing how people act on your site as it’s being built is probably treating them the most like a human being because you’re involving them in the process with you.

posted at 08:16 pm on July 9, 2007 by Steve Grieshaber