[Sigia-l] Re: Putting the "Graphic" back with "Designer"(was:the lesser importance of home pages)

[andrew at friendlymanual.com]

Quoting Malahat Hosseini <mhosseini at sfu.ca>:

> Then shouldn't we rather be saying that interface design is
> interaction design + visual design( graphic design) ?
>
> I feel interface design embodies graphic design instead of paralleling it.

Hi Malahat,

that sounds great on the face of it but it makes me uneasy. On one hand, a
holistic overview must see the visual/graphic design as part of the interface.
On the other hand, the interaction design is usually the bit that gets done
badly (although bad graphic design will kill an application just as surely).
Like I said, I believe that graphic design and interaction design are two
different hats. Both are arguably part of interface design but need to be
considered seperately, if only so that interaction design gets due attention. I
know that we are all professionals here and we have to assume that everyone
else is as well, but...

Veering off on a tangent: interaction design is a many-splendored thing as well
- scope boundaries have led to many UXD sin... "It is a perfect toaster, and it
is not my fault that the requirements did not specify that it had to work in a
multi-voltage environment". No-one should be blamed for building a system to
spec, but someone needs to find out what the end users really need.

Perhaps we are headed towards Ziya's perfect world where The <prefix no longer
applicable> Designer is the one responsible for getting it right.

Cheers, Andrew

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.