Fwd: [IxDA Discuss] Declarative UI process and UX teams?

Daphne Ogle daphne at media.berkeley.edu
Tue Apr 24 23:36:05 UTC 2007

An interesting Q & A on components...or at least the concept of them  
(this is an interaction design list I belong to).

I feel good reading this.  I think the thoughts/questions that come  
up below are the same ones that we are thinking about.  Although we  
don't have all the answers yet, being aware of the potential  
challenges (or how I usually like to think about this kind of  
thing...we know what we don't know -- or are starting to anyway), is  
probably more than half the battle.


Begin forwarded message:

> From: Chris Hunter <chunter at wondertwinpowers.net>
> Date: April 24, 2007 3:24:31 PM PDT
> To: discuss at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> Cc: Billie Mandel <Billie.Mandel at openwave.com>
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Declarative UI process and UX teams?
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Billie Mandel wrote:
>> Question of the day: if the development process of your product is
>> using
>> a declarative UI strategy, what does that mean for the UX design
>> team -
>> assuming the designers are not, in fact, the same people as the
>> developers?
>> How do designers work within that strategic framework?  What's our
>> value, if everything is so modularized that it can be (and probably
>> will
>> be) changed on the fly by the product's customers?
> I've had to work in a number of these kinds of situations. Here's
> some of my (brief) thoughts:
> * There's usually a lot of work done on the modules that are being
> assebled on the fly by customers/professional services/etc. Has
> everything been done to make sure that these modules behave
> consistently, that they're individually attractive, accessible and
> usable.
> * How are the designers contributing to the design of the framework?
> What options are available for laying out the modules? Are there
> consistent elements beyond the modules (navigation, search, etc...)?
> * Look at how the designers can contribute to the process of
> customization. How are modules found (browse, search)? What meta-data
> is presented? What are the decision making criteria customers use in
> assembling applications? What can be done to make the process of
> assembling components easier/quicker?
> And the question that I usually have to ask in these situations:
> Is it really necessary to have an open ended process for
> configuration? Would it be possible to identify some small number of
> applications that are a good fit for specific roles or tasks and just
> build those (perhaps with some _small_ degree of customization
> available via preferences)?
> Too often open-ended frameworks (or applications with boatloads of
> preferences) are a sign that nobody was willing to make hard
> decisions about what they're building/selling.
> Chris Hunter
> chunter at wondertwinpowers.net
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://listguide.ixda.org/
> List Help .................. http://listhelp.ixda.org/
> (Un)Subscription Options ... http://subscription-options.ixda.org/
> Announcements List ......... http://subscribe-announce.ixda.org/
> Questions .................. lists at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://ixda.org/
> Resource Library ........... http://resources.ixda.org

Daphne Ogle
Interaction Designer
University of California, Berkeley
Educational Technologies Services
daphne at media.berkeley.edu
cell (510)847-0308

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20070424/cf1b5dd3/attachment.htm>

More information about the fluid-work mailing list