IxD definition WAS Interaction Design forESL Textbooks?
15 Sep 2007 - 3:16am
7 years ago
[I love it how Andrew is now defining IxD, after he did a great job of defining the IA CoP at the IA Summit!]
> Like many newer practices (sociobiology, psycholinguistics, etc), isn't > Interaction Design a hybrid of other, earlier practices, that coalesced to > solve the new problems created by trying to make very complex, powerful > devices for personal consumer use?
Just as IxD is a hybrid of other, earlier practices, so will IxD be seen as a pre-cursor to the User Experience practice.
We all stand on the shoulders of giants. And there are giants standing next to our giants, with people on their shoulders.
Do I really need to refer to my T-model again, where I say:
"Now, what if we look at this model from the perspective of, say, an Interaction Designer (IxD)? I am sure the subscribers to the IxD mailinglist have little IxD's and Big IxD's amongst them. They have their own T-model, with the vertical line standing next to "our" vertical line, but their horizontal line overlaps with ours! And the same is true for usability specialists, copywriters, information designers, etc."
Interaction Designers should focus on defining/defending their vertical line of the T first and foremost, while looking left and right to the fields next to them.
Andrew suggested as the vertical line:
> "improving the interactive experience of complex, powerful > devices for personal consumer use"
As much as I like this, I would like to point people to the IxDA website, where it says:
"While interaction design has a firm foundation in the theory, practice, and methodology of traditional user interface design, its focus is on defining the complex dialogues that occur between people and interactive devices of many typesfrom computers to mobile communications devices to appliances."
I think this neatly combines Andrews history with a definition.