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

13 Sep 2004 - 12:20pm
488 reads
whitneyq
2010

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:

http://www.businessweek.com/1998/39/b3597037.htm

This also seems to hark back to the debates about agents vs. direct
manipulation between Shneiderman and Maes. See
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=267514 for a summary.

Central to Ben's point is that he wants the computer systems to assist/be
at the service of/complement humans -- but that people (not machines)
should be starting point for, and center of, any design effort.

Whitney Quesenbery
Whitney Interactive Design, LLC
w. www.WQusability.com
e. whitneyq at wqusability.com
p. 908-638-5467

UPA - www.usabilityprofessionals.org
STC Usability SIG: www.stcsig.org/usability

Syndicate content Get the feed