I apologize for not having caught up on the more extensive discussion. 1. I like your idea (that we discussed separately) of creating separate definitions of interaction design that work for different audiences.
2. We also vary on what we are trying to describe. It would be useful to bring forward the previous discussion that characterizes what work is being done. 3. Most of that was about identifying practitioners (a third dimension) and context. What background does the practitioner bring to interaction design? ---- Among the definitions that I have recently come across, one unifying characteristic is that interaction design is about problem solving. A good new definition would shed light on what sort of problems are being solved, what the context is in which they are being solved, who they are being solved for, who is doing the problem solving, and what techniques are being applied. Then presentation issues can be addressed: for each audience, what do they need to know in order to understand what interaction design will do for them? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=25491 ________________________________________________________________ *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
