Hi Josh, On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 3:37 AM, Josh Seiden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jarod-- just to be clear, I'm not making any claims about Larry's > work, other than to say that in his definition of ACD, he accounts > for goals and other higher-order concepts. This seems to contradict > what Jared posted about at the beginning of this thread: that ACD did > not account for these things. So I'm just asking Jared (not Jarod :-) > to clarify. > Sorry for miss-interpretation of your intention. And I agree, that Jared's ACD definition contradict with normal Activity Theory's activity definition. more links may as 1. http://www.amazon.com/Acting-Technology-Activity-Theory-Interaction/dp/0262112981 2. http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/1558608087/181-0321423-0466727?SubscriptionId=1100889MK2XY9PSTV5G2
Both clearly define activity holds user's motivation, context, and tool mediators. Regards, Jarod -- http://designforuse.blogspot.com/ ________________________________________________________________ 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
