< Prototypes are not always about invention, nor are they always about proving out a design. Often, they are a communication device. They're a way to document something otherwise difficult to describe with static wireframes and comps.>
That is how I see it. Models allow us to demonstrate behavior without the need to actually build the underlying code. Not only is it a communication device but it also forces the designer to design to enough completeness to enable others to see hoe it is going to work. The question of how detailed a model needs to be is one of those never-ending discussions. I keep calling these models "prototypes" but it gets us into trouble. We either need to qualify the term (e.g. Design Prototype, Conceptual Prototype) or use a different term like model. Let me touch on a related and I think very important issue. Ix Design differs from any other design field in that we have an empirical way to test our designs. When you have a model you can test it and that serves as validation that our designs work as anticipated. This allows us to, in a sense, guarantee the quality of our designs and that seems like a powerful opportunity. Charlie ________________________________________________________________ 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
