Dear All,
I think there may be a less problematic way of dealing with 'context'.
1. As designers, we all work in a 'context'. Depending on our point
of view, sophistication, social, environmental, and economic
sensitivity or awareness, we will each see this context slightly
differently. Sometimes, it's easy to describe our working context in
such a way that we can share what we do with others. At other times
it can be very difficult. But the basis of such a description is a
collection of statements such as: this is where I work; this is what
I can see from my position; this is what I think lies beyond what I
can see that may be important in my designing; these are the
constraints under which I work; these are the areas where I have some
freedom of action, etc.
2. As designers, the designs we create end up as objects/systems etc
that have to exist or be used in a particular 'context'. As part of
our designing, we want to take account of that 'context' so that our
creations can exist or be used appropriately in that 'context'. Once
again, depending on our point of view, sophistication, social,
environmental, and economic sensitivity or awareness, we will each
see this context slightly differently. In recent years, in some areas
of design, designers have tried to re-describe the 'context' in which
their designs have to exist or work. For example, taking account of
'users' or 'environmental issues' are relatively recent (last 50
years) re-descriptions of 'context'.
So, here are the two 'contexts' that are relevant to design. They
both involve interesting issues about problem spaces and problem
boundaries. These spaces and boundaries are part of our descriptions
of what we do. Do we need to say more about them?
David
--
Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA
Director • Communication Research Institute of Australia
• helping people communicate with people •
60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068
Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795
Phone: +61 (0)3 9489 8640
web: http://www.communication.org.au
|