ALAN PENN WROTE:
The fact that flow rates of people correlate with measures of axial maps has
consequences for co-presence. You are more likely to bump into people on
more integrated axial lines than on less integrated one (other things being
equal), hence it is possible for spatial morphology to have social
consequences.
This is all very easy to say, but Adipat's original question was about how
do you ACTUALLY USE syntax in design. This to my mind is a more difficult
question to answer since relatively little is formally understood about how
people design at all in the first place. I rely here on my experience of
trying to do that - use syntax theories and methods as part of a design
team.
QUESTION:
From the passage above, Alan posits that syntactic tools possess a form of
predictive possibility in correlating integration values and observed
co-presence. In relating this to the use of Syntax in design, I agree with
Alan that the role of syntax is as a set of tools for thinking as there is
neither a set formula nor a strategic set of processes that can determine
good design; what Syntax, thus, offers, in my opinion, is a set of
parameters that lead design thinking in a more informed direction.
Bearing the above in mind (as well as what has already been said about the
use of Syntax) surely the main potential, in the design process, of the
tools is at Concept Design stage (testing client / user requirement
specification) or at Post Completion stage (where, having been in occupation
for 12 - 18 months the same client / user requirements can be evaluated). In
other words, Syntax possibly forms the link between the front end and back
end of design provding the framework for the 'elusve' feedback loop!!
This may not (in the eyes of the ...SSL...) be entirely agreed with but I
would like to propose that, maybe, the power of Syntax is in the analysis of
the Layout and, perhaps, JUST looking at this in relation to the brief can
bring to light key indicators of performance. My question is, however, that
when looking at analysing a Layout (Plan), how important is it to back up
your analysis with observation, if what you are interested in is the
potentiality of the spatial design and in how a certain layout is
performing? i.e. can you derive enough useful information from just looking
at the plan and the spatial blueprint left after appropriation? I ask this
as observation seems to be the main detractor from using these ideas in
industry (not that I have been able to try as this, as I understand it,
requires appropriate permission, licencing and agreements!) as they have a
large cost attached (to do thoroughly, of course!)
My second question relates to licencing: If it is concluded that Syntax does
have value in looking at the more practical elements of design, and that the
'layout' in itself can provide the basis of some strategically useful
information for design then how does one obtain software licences to test
some of these new ideas (and make some mistakes in the process I am
sure...)? Here, I hope it is understood that I am referring to non-academic
licences...
Adipat
_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
|