 |
 |
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