Gunnar,
I don't know how you get "design that doesn't include designing" out of
what I wrote, but I'll leave whether you want to pursue that point up to
you.
Insofar as what I was on about with the domain and process stuff: it's
still something that is rather just around the corner from me - I can see
the shadow it casts but not quite the thing itself. I think of any design
activity as a transformation of information; I believe that one can
generalize information that's specific to a given problem or 'type' of
design, and that as one generalizes, one finds the activities apply to
broader and broader domains. When one reaches the point where anything
that might be a domain of designing is covered, then you're done.
The nearest I've come to putting words to it is in this paper: "Design as
balance-seeking instead of problem-solving" (
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/I/Papers/DPP09preprint.pdf)
I know it's not enough, but that's what I've got so far.
/fas
On 15 June 2012 16:28, Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'll wait to see what that is rather than speculating as to whether the
> difference of this bit of subtraction is in any way central to designers
> who work in the specific domains or to the nature of the domains. I'm quite
> suspicious of the very idea of design that doesn't include designing so I'm
> interested in how this description plays out. (Fil--I hope you plan on
> sharing it with us.)
--
\V/_
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|