I always thought that software design was more the programming side of things: from architecture down to the algorithm level; not what we do. It should (ideally, if humans are to be using it) include work that we do, but there is a load more that is nothing to do with us, unless we're specifically designing for programmers that is. For example, a database API won't usually be used by end-users: programmers will instead put layers of abstraction over it until it ends up as a nice and usable human-orientated interface (eg, being able to search through Flickr for photos of a particular subject). We may design the interface for Flickr, but the software designer working on the database API has no need to consider what the end users of Flickr want or need.
(later): Just checked and it is more of a programming field. I would like to suggest that because it (probably) already has a well-established definition that we leave it alone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=43357 ________________________________________________________________ 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
