> I think from a high-level point of view, your process is good. But I would > argue, we plan on several review steps prior to this point. It will not be > enough to passively hope folks provide feedback along the way. >
I highly doubt anyone on this list will "passively" provide feedback. :) How do you propose we acquire this feedback if not through this list? And the final outcome of this is not about the board agreeing to the > definitions, it is about the community at large actually using them when > they talk to others outside IxDA > Of course, but putting it on the IxDA site is key to this effort. Part of the goal is to build up IxDA's credibility, so it becomes as authoritative and meaningful as other similar groups, such as AIGA. If we're creating the definitions (and really, who would be more qualified?) as part of IxDA, then we should use the opportunity to improve the IxDA reputation and brand. Saying you're a member of IxDA should mean something to other designers. It should mean you're part of a group of people who are passionate about their work, to helping others, and to advancing the profession. Right now, I don't know anyone outside of this list that has even heard of IxDA. 1) We identify scope (those terms we will define) > UCD, ACD, and genius design are the whole list at the moment, but I'm sure other things will come up. I don't see a need to restrict it up front beyond limiting it to design-related definitions. 2) We have a first draft which *may* not have a candidate definition. But it > does contain many of the most common definitions used and summarizes all of > the issues needing to be resolved when nailing it down. > First draft should be a new definition based on discussion about existing definitions. Why not start with a candidate definition? I'm not saying it'll fly on the first try, only that we should put forth something that attempts to meet its goal rather than burn time on a hybrid of everything else already out there. I think it would be better to model it after the Oxford English Dictionary*. > e.g. contain the definition of the term as well as a reasonable amount of > research to justify the definition. > I agree that research should go into the decision-making process, but elaborate on why you think it should be included in the definition itself? -r- ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
