Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Yes in fact the D's are more than 3 and everywhere, and Architecture as IX are part of the same global project in direction of a better world, let's have standards so they can be broken. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=22000 *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
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
I think that we need several things so that the documentation we produce is fully understood by our fellow engineers. I'm an architect by education so please bear with my analogies. 1) We need a standardized visual language so that whenever we change jobs we don't need to learn yet another way to document things. Architects have their own visual language and it's consistent from the US to Japan. Any engineer or builder can pick up an architect's drawing and start building straight-away. 2) We need interactive prototypes for more complex interactions. Even with a nice set of blueprints, without a cardboard or 3d model no one would understand how to build a Frank Gehry building. It's just too complex just for blueprints. 3) We need a clear set of standardized and simple deliverables. A blueprint has most of what anyone needs to know about a particular floor in a building. It has links to other drawings as well. But everything lies mostly on one page. Sometimes UX documentation is just too scattered (interaction guidelines, wireframes, detailed object interactions). Put yourself on an engineers shoes. Would you bother going through a pile of documents just to build the simplest of things? That's why most of what engineers build upon what we deliver them is so off on the first iteration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://gamma.ixda.org/discuss?post=22000 *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
As Bruno Zevi once wrote, Architecture is indeed 4D. You can't develop your perception of a building without walking through it. That's the 4th dimension and why 3D walkthroughs are so popular. Yes, architecture had a lot of time to develop standards, but mankind as produced more information on the last decade than all of the previous centuries combined. To achieve standardization we have to communicate, and communication is as easy as ever. What we have to do is to take clues from existing 4D representations. And build upon what each one of us had to develop for our own projects. If we managed to come up with solutions for our problems by ourselves, just imagine what we could do together. Jesse James Garret already started this whit a basic set of visual representations. We just have to improve upon it. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://gamma.ixda.org/discuss?post=22000 *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
I love analogies between architecture and IX. I think there are many similarities, but there are some significant differences that tend to work against your point: 3) We need a clear set of standardized and simple deliverables. A blueprint has most of what anyone needs to know about a particular floor in a building. It has links to other drawings as well. But everything lies mostly on one page. Sometimes UX documentation is just too scattered (interaction guidelines, wireframes, detailed object interactions). Put yourself on an engineers shoes. Would you bother going through a pile of documents just to build the simplest of things? That's why most of what engineers build upon what we deliver them is so off on the first iteration. Architecture is 3D and lends itself to diagrammatic representation. IX design, in my opinion is 4D. The fourth dimension is time. Interactions are by their very nature a series of events that take place on the time axis. Representing the interactions that take place in time in a primary document has always been a challenge -- thus story boards, annotations, prototypes, etc. are necessary to communicate (at times poorly) the dynamic elements of the project. I would love to see standardization also, but I don't expect it soon. Architecture has had 5 millennia to evolve some standards, software has had 5 decades :). Joseph Selbie Founder, CEO Tristream Web Application Design http://www.tristream.com *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Bruno, I too am hopeful that it won't take 5000 years to develop standards for IX design :). I just don't think it is simply a matter of agreeing on *existing* standards. What we are designing is rapidly evolving, which is requiring an equally rapid evolution of the tools we use to design. I can imagine a day in the not too distant future where we have one type of design tool that outputs any kind of documentation -- one to many, not many to one. If you want to see the design as a working prototype it could give it to you -- in any of a variety of standards. If you want to see the design as a series of schematic drawings it could give it to you -- in any of a variety of standards. We see glimpses of this kind of tool in some of the interoperations between programs such as Photoshop and Dreamweaver or Fireworks and Flash -- but these are just the beginning. Someday we'll have our version of AutoCAD Inventor. As to architecture being 4D, I think this is a bit disingenuous. Everything is in fact 4D. The universe we inhabit is 4D. And of course any design process, architecture or any other, necessarily requires an awareness of this reality. But an architect only needs to take into account the *fact* that people will interact with the building. With IXD it is necessary to *design* the way people can interact with an application, or website, or OS with a moment by moment, click by click level of detail and accuracy. I'm sure one can make a case that people interact with buildings. But I think it is also fair to say that nearly all of those interactions are commonly understood and accepted. The interactions that we in our profession are designing are often completely new, and cannot rely on accepted understanding to be communicated -- thus the need for the current complexity of design documentation. Joseph Selbie Founder, CEO Tristream Web Application Design http://www.tristream.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruno Figueiredo Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 8:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...) As Bruno Zevi once wrote, Architecture is indeed 4D. You can't develop your perception of a building without walking through it. That's the 4th dimension and why 3D walkthroughs are so popular. Yes, architecture had a lot of time to develop standards, but mankind as produced more information on the last decade than all of the previous centuries combined. To achieve standardization we have to communicate, and communication is as easy as ever. What we have to do is to take clues from existing 4D representations. And build upon what each one of us had to develop for our own projects. If we managed to come up with solutions for our problems by ourselves, just imagine what we could do together. Jesse James Garret already started this whit a basic set of visual representations. We just have to improve upon it. *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Due to this thread, I decided to just directly ask the developers I work with what they thought. Since I work so closely with them daily, if there's a doubt or question they just ask me. I realize that in larger organizations, there is more isolation between groups so the documents have to speak for themselves. Thus I also asked my developer friend at Yahoo for that perspective. For the most part, annotated wireframes, concise written explanations, and a complete set of visual designs is sufficient for most things. Unless the interaction is completely new or unusual, the (good) developers know how to build common UI elements (think typical suburban home vs. Gehry building). However, I did find that one developer preferred if everything was spelled out in a sort of a tech. spec list fashion (hex colors, fonts sizes, dimensions) for the visual stuff. While another preferred to ignore those indications and go into the PSD files and measure it himself. The reason for the latter being that the direct translation of those specs aren't perfect when implemented in code, so he is doing a semantic translation. This is probably why it's important to have all of these different document forms saying the same thing differently. Different developers work in different ways just like everybody else. As long as the end results are what I planned, I don't really care too much about their particular process for getting there. FYI, I export all my spec docs to Wiki-style HTML after writing them in VoodooPad. I try to indicate whenever things are being shared between web pages so the developer doesn't start building the same thing twice. I also try to include as many See: [link] and other crosslinks so the developers don't have to poke around the document to find relevant information. It's all in one huge document with links from page to related page. I'll continue to do my informal interviewing of developers and report if I find anything interesting. -Dan On Nov 2, 2007, at 2:56 AM, Bruno Figueiredo wrote: 1) We need a standardized visual language so that whenever we change jobs we don't need to learn yet another way to document things. Architects have their own visual language and it's consistent from the US to Japan. Any engineer or builder can pick up an architect's drawing and start building straight-away. *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Facilitating discussion is what I would like to happen in F2F events here in Toronto. Well, the first one did not quite become a F2F, we'll try again :) Referring to the departmental conflicts ... teamwork and ownership gets foggy and lost whenever groups get beyond a certain number (I don't know this magic number). So even in a team of two or three (very crucial for larger groups), ownership and flat-playing field HAS to be encouraged. Just like this discussion forum, engineers, designers, and MBAs and whoever else or whatever the title have to be EQUAL. Human beings have a super propensity for hierarchy and worse politics. hierarchy get work done, but politics makes it mediocre. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://gamma.ixda.org/discuss?post=22000 *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Dumping Agile in the mix... My overwhelming experience has been that regardless of what design deliverable ID's creates, having proximity, dialogue and iteration with various stakeholders, during the design cycles is the key to success. Throwing design deliverables over the wall, regardless of how great these deliverables are tends to lead to disaster. These collaborative, proximal and iterative aspects of Agile processes aides design as well as development, I think it would probably aide the design of most things period. Rich *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Lots of good answers here... but so far not one person has said that, in their experience, engineers don't understand UXD documentation. David's distinction between value and understand is good: do engineers understand our documents but still dislike them? This is what I really wanted to know, because, again, in my experience the opposite -- that they totally get and greatly appreciate our documentation -- is decidedly true. -Cf Christopher Fahey Behavior biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com me: http://www.graphpaper.com *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
I can't help but plug my book here, Communicating Design. It covers 10 different UX documents, and is written in part from the perspective mentioned earlier in this thread: we need to apply user-centered design techniques to our own artifacts. More info at: www.communicatingdesign.com We now return you to our regularly scheduled discussion... -- Dan On 11/1/07, Christopher Fahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lots of good answers here... but so far not one person has said that, in their experience, engineers don't understand UXD documentation. David's distinction between value and understand is good: do engineers understand our documents but still dislike them? This is what I really wanted to know, because, again, in my experience the opposite -- that they totally get and greatly appreciate our documentation -- is decidedly true. -Cf Christopher Fahey Behavior biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com me: http://www.graphpaper.com *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help -- | work: eightshapes.com | book: communicatingdesign.com | blog: greenonions.com | talk: +1 (301) 801-4850 *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Christopher, My previous answer to your question was that getting the engineers to participate in the design process was essential to them getting the essence of the project -- a holistic understanding without which they may easily stray during the development phase. To answer your question more pointedly, I'd say that engineers will get many types of documentation (perhaps all types) as long as they have participated in the process that led to the documentation. But if they don't participate, no particular documentation type will insure that they get it. Joseph Selbie Founder, CEO Tristream Web Application Design http://www.tristream.com Lots of good answers here... but so far not one person has said that, in their experience, engineers don't understand UXD documentation. David's distinction between value and understand is good: do engineers understand our documents but still dislike them? This is what I really wanted to know, because, again, in my experience the opposite -- that they totally get and greatly appreciate our documentation -- is decidedly true. -Cf Christopher Fahey *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
I think part of this is driven by the quality of the artifact itself. We've actually done usability testing on our artifacts with the engineers and visual designers using them to find out how we can improve them. After all, our artifacts are the product/service we're creating for our clients, just like their hardware/software/service is the thing they're producing for their customers. On Nov 1, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Christopher Fahey wrote: This is what I really wanted to know, because, again, in my experience the opposite -- that they totally get and greatly appreciate our documentation -- is decidedly true. Cheers! Todd Zaki Warfel President, Design Researcher Messagefirst | Designing Information. Beautifully. -- Contact Info Voice: (215) 825-7423 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://toddwarfel.com -- In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not. *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
[IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
On Oct 30, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Rich Rogan wrote: Cooper states engineers don't know/ can't follow design, ID design in particular. This also struck me when I read the article -- the implication that engineers don't get UXD documents. Others have repeated this in this thread as well. This, too, I disagree with. In fact, I have consistently found exactly the opposite to be true. A high-fidelity wireframe or UI design specification makes the engineer's job *way* easier in terms of delivering exactly what the business and user requires. They are short and sweet. They are visual. The readability and understandability of UI specs (especially compared to old-school functional specs) are usually crystal clear: See this? Build it. If what they build doesn't match what our docs say, then they built it wrong. How hard is that? Many engineers have, when working with a firm like mine for the first time, thought of our UI specs as a godsend. They see it as a radical improvement in the whole software engineering process, because it leaves so little to guesswork or ad hoc filling in the gaps. They know that senior management has signed off on the specs, that users have seen them, that the UI design work has already been figured out. Some, of course, see it as a turf encroachment because our documents tend to leave little wiggle room for backing off from difficult features, and they often require engineers to push back in places where our easy-to-build wireframes require months of work to actually build. They also sometimes risk curtailing engineering innovation by leaving little wiggle room in the positive direction, too. But I've never, ever heard that UXD documents are hard to understand! In what ways do engineers find UXD documentation hard to follow? -Cf Christopher Fahey Behavior biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com me: http://www.graphpaper.com I don't think anyone writing in this thread feel Cooper is attacking ID, rather he seems to be rehashing very old positive concepts on ID, without considering massive advances the ID field has experienced in the past 10 years +, (note without a doubt Mr Cooper can take credit for many advances). His comments seem very relevant if it were say, 1995, but it's 2007 and there are more involved issues with design and development then development simply being ignorant of design. _ Regarding Katie's comment: It seems that you believe that there once was a tendency for builders to start building before the underlying work of the designer was in place, but that that no longer happens in today's good companies. My point of what troubles IxDA designers, and me in particular, was a little more nuanced then either above black and white statements. The main issues I deal with today are not when engineers don't know or can't follow ID design, but rather when there are many factors in the mix, which necessitate multi-facteted solutions rather then all would be good if engineers just got design. What are some of these factors, Katie does a decent job listing a few, such as time constraints, resource constraints, engineers design limitations, etc. This list goes on and on. Add in lots of business problems that might come up, these are the issues I deal with every day and need solutions to, as well as engineers that get it, don't get it, don't want to get it, and are trying to compete to get it. *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
On 10/31/07, Christopher Fahey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some, of course, see it as a turf encroachment because our documents tend to leave little wiggle room for backing off from difficult features, and they often require engineers to push back in places where our easy-to-build wireframes require months of work to actually build. They also sometimes risk curtailing engineering innovation by leaving little wiggle room in the positive direction, too. At the end of the day, we need to be thinking of the consumers of our documentation. If engineers, UI teams, or business folks don't *get* our documentation, why are we creating it? Another thing I'd add is that while we may be the owners of our documents, I feel we should be consulting with engineers, design, product, business, etc., during document creation as much as possible. Let expertise reign where appropriate. janna *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
[IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
The question of whether or not engineers understand interaction design is interesting in that it seems to be putting the responsibility of understanding on the engineers. In my opinion, it's not the engineers fault if they don't get it. It's the interaction designers duty to communicate the interaction. If the engineers don't get it the interaction designer needs to to a better job. Oh yea and if the final interaction docs and specs are the first thing the engineers see then it's wonder they don't all go on strike and leave us with nice specs and wireframes but no software. - Josh Viney *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
Another thing I'd add is that while we may be the owners of our documents, I feel we should be consulting with engineers, design, product, business, etc., during document creation as much as possible. Let expertise reign where appropriate. Janna, I couldn't agree more. If the programmers can't understand our final deliverables I feel that our process has failed. I am happy to say that we almost never have significant problems in this regard. Our success comes from insisting that the programmers who will be responsible for building the application we design are represented in the design process from the beginning. We insist on participation in workshops, iterative approval processes and rough prototypes. By the time we finish our process the programming team usually knows and understands the design as fully as we do (maybe not quite as fully but close). Designing software apart from programmer input and participation is, in my experience, asking for trouble. 1.) What you design may not be able to be built -- period. 2.) Programmers may have tremendous resistance to the design (which could have been overcome if they were included in the design process). 3.) The design is accepted but suffers the death of a thousand cuts as many little changes are deemed necessary during the build process. In my experience, methodical collaboration with the right mix of roles creates a shared, holistic understanding of the project that no amount of exactitude in design deliverables can ever achieve on its own. Joseph Selbie Founder, CEO Tristream Web Application Design http://www.tristream.com *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
Re: [IxDA Discuss] Do Engineers Understand UX documents? (was Alan Cooper on Software...)
I have found that the only true artifact a developer understands is coded interactive prototype. W/o one there is always ambiguity left for cultural interpretation. But I do think there is a difference between understanding and valuing. for example in our current studio I was sitting with an industrial designer who said something that I say everyday. Basically, I hate working with engineers. Yup, its horrible, but true, but in many cultural environments there is a real problem in the sub-position that states that he who builds or he who buys has the final say. Now the latter one I get, though it doesn't promote a very good collaborative environment. But heck there are business run (bottom line) run companies out there that are a pain to work for for both designer and engineer (my previous employer for example.) But there is also that case where engineers in many design environments take the point of view of design as suggestion and they will build it as they way. This isn't about understanding, but it is about valuing. The example my colleague was discussing was contrasting how an engineer feels they can say, I can't do that. and there should be no further discussion about it, but when I designer says, This is the design, it means that this is a start for negotiation. Blah! Josh V. I disagree w/ you. Yes, in any 2-way relationship everyone is responsible for communicating, but in every 2-way relationship everyone is responsible for being respectful and being engaged. To me we have our burden, but they have theirs as well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://gamma.ixda.org/discuss?post=22000 *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://gamma.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines http://gamma.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .. http://gamma.ixda.org/help
