Rosan,
Couldn't agree more.
Cheers.
Fil
Rosan Chow wrote:
> Hi David
>
> thanks for some clear statements about context and design. that's how i will say about them too, but will say a little bit more (and some of them might just be re-statements).
>
> a context is a construction. ('a theoretical model' in Fils' usage).
> a context and a design are functional (conceptual) distinctions, nothing more...but very useful.
>
> a context is highly (interconnected) with a design. but we call 'it' a particular context, when (or after) a particular design is determined. (as Jonas and others like to say, after a design is finished, what we know more is the problem).
>
> when treated as related but separate, we might suggest that constructing a context (e.g. user study) is not the same as constructing a design (a specification in my usage). and that determining a particular design might well come before determining a particular context (e.g. user study)...and that the 'physical' separation between constructing a context (e.g. user study) and constructing a design does not make sense. (and here is a light-weather argument why it is important that designers are actively involved in user study... and why it is important to understand designing IS a form of inquiry not Requires (has) inquiry, as others want us to believe.
>
> Rosan
> [...]
--
Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University Tel: 416/979-5000 x7749
350 Victoria St. Fax: 416/979-5265
Toronto, ON email: [log in to unmask]
M5B 2K3 Canada http://deed.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|