Hello Everyone,
By way of introduction: I have been following the discussions on this list
for several months with a great deal of interest, and an equal amount of
perplexity. I am in the throes of finalising a degree in design at the
University of Western Sydney in Australia, and am keenly interested in
continuing my formal studies. By day, I work in a design studio,
predominantly creating rich educational media, and so I am under some
obligation to seek concrete (or at least reliably practical) application for
my theorising and research.
To the issue of terminology, and a potential resolution:
François-X. N.I. NSENGA wrote:
>>On the other hand, that might perhaps be what has been going on since the
beginning of the list !
>>A sort of an online brainstorming. Would then be someone or a team out
there to work specifically
>>on the "conceptual and terminological language", a "compendium" (Pradeep
Yammiyavar's post,
>>Tuesday, 29 Oct. 2002) of the field ?
It seems to me as well that terminological development is occurring here.
However, perhaps due to the nature of mailing lists and archives, the
definitions are not captured manner which provides a base from which
discussion can move forward.
Would it be possible for the members of this list to begin to capture and
crystallise this language and create such a compendium? I am sure it would
be possible to use some of the collaborative software that is freely
available (e.g. wikis). Terms and descriptions could either be entered
directly by a person at a given url, or emailed to the list to be collected
and entered by a volunteer (undoubtedly, such an email could/would also open
a specific dialogue concerning the term).
The technicalities of hosting, etc. aside, are there any conceptual or moral
issues which make this unachievable? It would seem a good step forward for
this community, and has the potential of creating a lasting legacy for our
wider profession.
I look forward to hearing members' thoughts.
My regards, and thanks to all for this list,
Chris Kemmett
|