On Mar 29, 2009, at 4:53 PM, Jon Kolko wrote:
==
I can agree that an "experience" is a personal thing that can no
more be
designed than love can be architected or happiness blueprinted. But
we *can*
create the affordances that suggest, coax, and guide users towards
experiences we designers can reasonably *hope* or even *expect* to
occur,
experiences that our own experience tells us are *likely* to occur.
==
I descibe what I do to clients as designing "experience frameworks" or
designing "experience scafolds", and I make the above point over and
over
again.
So we should call ourselves "experience framework designers"?
It begs the question, What does it mean to design interactions?
Or, look at the field of "industrial design". Does that mean those
people design industries?
I find the idea that "experience design" is somehow not valid because
"you can't design experiences" to be a red herring at best, and a
canard at worst. Our community has no other accepted term to address
the breadth that experience design discovers, with the possible
exception of "design," but that word has been so abused and pejorated
over the last, I don't know, at least 50 years, that we can't hang our
collective hat there.
--peter
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
