On 03/03/2008, Michael Micheletti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:50 AM, Whitney Quesenbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > I dread the day something as intellectually rigorous and challenging as > Labanotation is head-nodded all around for documenting system > interactions. > That evolutionary branch of IxD will dead-end as an academic backwater, > much > as Labanotation has in the dance community. The rest of us will move along > and design stuff.
I wonder if this notation could be reworked through the "Cognitive dimensions" design space ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dimensions ), in order to produce more user-friendly alternate notations adapted to different contexts. I don't know much about dance nor movement notations, but I recall seeing in Tufte's books some old dancing diagrams based on footsteps and mannequins that had a much lower abstraction level. Surely an expert designer with dancing knowledge could produce a more usable formalism to represent body movement? ________________________________________________________________ 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
