Dear Terry and all
Terry, in one of your response to Gunnar yesterday, you wrote:
" ...the output of all design fields is *a specification for something to
be made or done* "
I entirely agree that "the output of all design - subfields - is a
specification, either implemented by the designer her/himself in a studio
or workshop, or by skilled technicians and laborers in a factory or any
other corresponding production set up.
I wish, however, you had elaborated as well upon what is that "something"
that is specified by the designer. Filippo Salustri gave you/us a hint in
his last post dated April 27, but neither you nor anyone else picked it up
with a view to exchange further on what that "something" of our shared
concern is, and ought to be.
In an off-list exchange I subsequently had with Fill, we both came to agree
that this "something" is most probably, space! In a way or in another,
using any language (including maths that would be needed for a given type
and level of specification), and any method you may think of, Fil, myself,
and probably others are convinced that the fundamental "something" that we
all do as designers is first and foremost to enclose space into 'specified'
tangible shapes, or 'regions' as Fill says in his highly edifying - yet
overlooked? - paper:
*http://digitalcommons.ryerson.ca/islandora/object/RULA%3A310
<http://digitalcommons.ryerson.ca/islandora/object/RULA%3A310>*
And those interested to dig deeper into this conceptualization of the
'object' of design, you may also wish to give a glimpse at the initial
insight I co-authored in 2004, under the title: "*The Geography of Material
Artefacts and an Outline for Synergetic Geography" (1).*
Back to "specification" of that "something" that, if you too agree, is a
"region" in space, in your successive late posts you insisted instead that
'specification' is a "choosing process". I don't know that much about the
English connotation but, in French for instance, a difference is made
between "choix" (n) and "choisir" (v), and "sélection" (n) and
"sélectionner" (v).
Perhaps, in your posts you meant 'selection' instead of 'choice'. As the
former term connotes a more rigorously reasoned process that, on
appropriate occasion, would incidentally necessitate expressing it in
certain and appropriate level of mathematical language.
Thank you for having so tenaciously led us to this deeper and better
understanding of what we do!
Best wishes
Francois
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> (...)
>
>
> I'm suggesting that design is fundamentally ONLY a choice process. That is
> a
> process of choosing what will be included in the design, the specification
> document that describes the outcome that can later be done or made.
>
(...)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|