Discussion Archive: September 2004

14 Sep 2004 - 11:50am
Martyn Jones BSc

Typical Project?

Sorry - I'm not normally one to forward cr*p - but this seemed relevant:

Martyn Jones BSc
Interaction Designer
Kode Digital Ltd.

14 Sep 2004 - 6:30am
Christina Li

Looking for contents for a bilingual webzine

Hi Dave,

I think I have subscribed this list by this email account. Sorry! Please
help me to post this then.

13 Sep 2004 - 9:34pm
12 years ago
12 replies
Greg Petroff

ixd curriculum

Anyone in the list interested in discussing what an
interaction design curriculum would look like, rather
then where we have all come from?

I am an ex-architect so I know that route and there
are some pieces there that work well.

13 Sep 2004 - 12:37pm
Elizabeth Buie

Behaviour undone -- The fatal inversion in IxDs definition

For some reason, in considering whether the user is acting on a symbol or
on the object for which it stands, I am reminded of Alice and the White
Knight. See http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~nicholson/alice.html

(In his notes on this section, Martin Gardner in _The_Annotated_Alice_
speculates that Caroll was having a bit of fun with us.

13 Sep 2004 - 12:20pm

RE: Behaviour undone -- The fatal inversion in IxDs definition

At 01:02 PM 9/13/2004 -0400, David Heller wrote:
>I would maybe edit that (maybe this is a bit of word smithing) and switch
>the world "reflect" for the word "compliment" ...

I think you mean "complement"

It would be interesting to put together a
>"bill of rights" of IxD.

One place to start is with the list that Claire Marie Karat wrote back in 1998:


This also seems to hark back to the debates about agents v

13 Sep 2004 - 11:50am
12 years ago
2 replies
Robert Reimann

Behaviour undone -- The fatal inversion in IxDs definition (w as RE: PID: Personal Interface Definitions)

Nick is saying (I think) that system behaviors and models should reflect
human behaviors and mental models, rather than vice versa, a sentiment I
agree with entirely (as I imagine many people on the list do).

As one of the proponents of casting the field of IxD as
centering on the design of system behaviors, I want to be clear about
this: to adequately design system behaviors, the human behaviors and goals
that the system is attempting to facilitate must be deeply understood
and addressed in the design.

I must also disagree that "behaviors are for people, ...not software",

13 Sep 2004 - 11:05am
Adlin, Tamara

Two Jobs at Amazon

Hello all.
We're looking for two people--on focused on Information Architecture and design, one focused on Usability testing.
The IA job is primarily consulting with product groups around the company.
The usability tester needs considerable experience.

I love it here. If you're interested, know someone who's interested, or want to see the full job descriptions, send me an email and let's chat.


tamara adlin . usability specialist . amazon.com . tamara at amazon.com . 206.266.1258

13 Sep 2004 - 10:40am
Rick Cecil

Job Opening: Web Designer

hesketh.com is excited to announce a new Web Designer position.

Title: Web Designer

Occupational Summary:

As a Web Designer for hesketh.com, you will be responsible for the
visual design of Web site and application designs and implementation
for our progressive client base using a user-centered design approach
and employing tools such as Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, xHTML, and

13 Sep 2004 - 8:52am
12 years ago
2 replies
Meyer, Fred

Video Camera Advice

I need some advice on whether or not to purchase a video camera. If a camera
is a good idea, what attributes should it have?

The video camera would be used in focus group meetings (recording an entire
room) and for usability tests (recording someone while they work at a

The camera sounds like a great idea, but I am not sure if anyone actually
takes the time to go back and review the recordings.

13 Sep 2004 - 8:29am
Gerard Torenvliet

Behaviour undone -- The fatal inversion in IxDs definition (was RE:PID: Personal Interface Definitions)


I second Andrei's call for clarity here - I don't understand what you're tilting at.

The best I can do is:

- you contend that behaviours are designed for people, not computers or interfaces or software or widgets
- you contend that to speak as behaviour as an attribute of a system and of a human in close proximity is a contradiction
- you say that one of these is 'forward' and the other is 'reverse' (retrograde?)

A few questions:

1) Why can't we have it both ways, depending on your frame of reference?