For question 1: One more goal we haven't explicitly included that is
very important is creating a shared language. When we all know
exactly what we mean (or can go to the pattern for clarification)
when we say "lightbox overlay" it sure makes the conversation more
smooth. I actually think in a diverse community like ours that this
might be one of the biggest benefits we get from the library.
More comments in-line with Paul's...
-Daphne
On May 13, 2008, at 11:07 AM, Paul Zablosky wrote:
I have some thoughts that bear on QotDs 1 and 2. To my mind, the
OSDPL is a setting down of a portion of the body of knowledge that
expresses the principles of good design. As such, it should serve as
a reference work, as well as a repository for study. While it may
be used more by junior/new designers, I think it sends the wrong
signal to explicitly target them in the goal statement. Those new to
any area of expertise always refer more frequently to the reference
works of their trade, but the reference works are generally aimed at
the whole profession.
This is a really good point! Although we want to design the patterns
in a way that is helpful to more junior designers (assuming if it
works for them, it will also work for Senior Designers), we don't have
to be explicit about that in the goal statement. +1 for removing
those terms.
As for target audience, it is my hope that the OSDPL will be
accessible to both designers and developers, and its contents serve
as a focus for common understanding between them. I'd like to see
this expressed somehow in the goal statement. Roughly, it could say:
The primary goal of the design pattern library will be to promulgate
design patterns as an approach to the creation of usable, high-
quality user interfaces. For the purposes of the library, a design
pattern is defined as "a proven solution to a common problem in a
specified context". The library will have a practical focus: as a
common source of design inspiration and examples of best practice
for both designers and developers, as well as serving as a focus of
discussion for their collaborative efforts.
That could use some polishing, but it covers the cases I'm thinking
about. Of course, I could be missing the point about all of this.
I'm interested to hear what other people think.
I agree and would also like to see the library useful to both
designers and developers.
I do have some concerns about whether 1 version of a design pattern
will work for both audiences though. I think I mentioned on the call
that it might be useful to have a couple different levels of pattern.
This is generalization but I'll use it to express my point. Designers
want to understand why this is the right pattern, who else has used
it, what other design considerations do they need to think about when
using the pattern, etc. They want interaction consistency with some
flexibility for innovation and different contexts. I think many
developers want it to 'cut to the chase', "just tell me how to solve
this interaction problem" or "tell me how to implement this solution,
don't give me a bunch of different options" -- much more
prescriptive. They are also going to want to have code examples or
actual code to use. Additionally, the 2 disciplines search strategies
may also be quite different from one another.
I can't outline all the distinctions right now but my gut tells me we
have 2 primary personas for the OSDPL: 1) Junior Designers (more
experienced designers are secondary because their needs will be met by
meeting the Junior Designers needs) and 2) Developers / implementors.
Each primary persona needs their own interface so in this case they
need their own form of the pattern. This doesn't have to mean 2
completely different patterns. I think it could be as simple as a
full version and a stripped down version.
Paul
Allison Bloodworth wrote:
Hi folks,
A couple folks missed the question of the day I sent out Sunday
night, so I'm resending it along with the second question of the
day for the Open Source Design Pattern Library. Please feel free to
either respond to this email thread and/or add your answers to this
wiki page: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/fluid/OSDPL+Discussion+Questions+and+Answers
1. At http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/fluid/Design+Patterns+Library+Proposal
<mime-attachment.gif>, our proposed goal reads:
"The primary goal of the design pattern library will be to
introduce design patterns as a way to design usable, high-quality
user interfaces in specific contexts ("a proven solution to a
common problem in a specified context"). The library will have a
practical focus, intended mostly as a tool for junior/new designers
as well as developers. It will not focus on creating a complete
pattern language, or describing patterns in a more academic sense."
Is this the best statement of our goal? Can we add to this and
flesh it out more?
2. Who is the audience of the OSDPL? Are we trying to serve too
many different audiences, and if so, should we try to pick a
primary audience to serve? Is it possible to pick a primary
audience to focus on where if we serve their needs, we will end up
serving most of the needs of our other audiences? (This is a
similar concept to picking a primary persona on whom to focus a
website or application's design. In this situation we also try to
meet the needs of secondary personas, but never to the detriment of
the primary persona's experience.)
See:http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/fluid/Design+Patterns+Library+Proposal
for some initial ideas on this.
Looking forward to getting your feedback on these important issues
-- see you at our next meeting Wednesday, May 14th, 10am PDT on
Fluid's Breeze server: http://breeze.yorku.ca/fluidwork (no login
required, just enter as a guest and turn on your camera/
microphone). Feel free to add additional discussion items to the
agenda on this page: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/x/0Ywk.
Allison
Allison Bloodworth
Senior User Interaction Designer
Educational Technology Services
University of California, Berkeley
(415) 377-8243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list
[email protected]
http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
--
You are currently subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/jasig-ue
Daphne Ogle
Senior Interaction Designer
University of California, Berkeley
Educational Technology Services
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cell (510)847-0308
_______________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list
[email protected]
http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
