[Sigia-l] UML - still not fit for the UCD?

[Pradyot Rai]

"Pierre Roberge" wrote -

> To me, Interaction is bigger than the design of the interaction.

In other words, the user's expectations/experiences are the most important
then the underlying processes/tools to create it, right?

> ... It is
> a methodology that helps define what the product will do and which
> *objects* a user will interact with...

There is no question that they should complement each other. The point of
contention has been that they don't. The process which preceeds UML,
Unified Process, and UCD don't go together for political reasons, which
have been discussed before. Unified Process is suppose too look at the
*objects* alone and UCD must guarentee *users* interest, is what can
complement each other.

> So in my opinion, UML and UCD can
> benefit each other if Interaction Design precedes any UML encoding of
> the design.

The whole point of this discussion of critisising UP (as against UCD) is
because it makes the false promisses of meeting UCD goals too. Now with
the suggestion you are making here, I see the same problem with slight
difference - Now UCD will make false impressions about what is meant
withing the UP framework.

This should not confuse us that Unified Process is meant to carry out what
is *designed* or *required* while UCD is to create the *design* which
user's point of view. The whole stuff about 'UML' and 'Objects' is
*engineering* and should be treated outside the gamut of ID/IA/UX.

Pradyot Rai