On 1 Feb 2008, at 08:18, dave malouf wrote:
Luis, I think Adrian was being flippant about the whole UI vs. IxD
thread. Maybe they just call it UI Design and they think of all the
aspects of IxD to be included there.
[snip]
Mildly flippant - yes :-)
Just because somebody doesn't label
On 1 Feb 2008, at 14:29, W Evans wrote:
It just highlights to me this notion of people are doing
interaction design
without knowing they are doing it.
Absolutely. When I just read that - I was reminded of something Dan
S. wrote
in the first chapter of Designing for Interfaces that
On Feb 1, 2008 9:29 AM, W Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And from a previous conversation about IxD versus ID, I want to ecco Mark
Schraad's comment that a lot of that discussion/definitions is also handed
pretty eloquently by Mssr. Saffer. If any of you haven't read it - shame on
you!
http://tinyurl.com/ysxtyg
Hi guys, the above link is to a blog post by a UI Developer blogger. Lots of
what he is talking about is the stuff that we talk about.
It just highlights to me this notion of people are doing interaction design
without knowing they are doing it.
Just great! And a much
It just highlights to me this notion of people are doing interaction design
without knowing they are doing it.
Absolutely. When I just read that - I was reminded of something Dan S. wrote
in the first chapter of Designing for Interfaces that argued that exact same
point. People who don't even
...Using real-time vectors, gradients, and animations is something that a
styling
engine needs to support: and it's something that CSS simply is not made to
handle.
That's an unfortunate statement massively ignorant of technical facts,
computer screen display basics and the current state of
