On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Dan Saffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 14, 2008, at 12:28 AM, Sachendra Yadav wrote: > > > I agree with Dave, the relevance of Apple article is it gives insights > > into the process they follow, and it's good to know it's not much > > different from the rest of the industry. > > It's not that different (no secret sauce) except for two key points: > > - The time allotted to find (and explore) the correct solution. > Months, not days or weeks. > > - The depth to which they go (pixel perfect mockups) of their proposed > solutions. Not sketches or wireframes. > > > Dan
I was recently reading Bill Buxton's chapter on the role/power of ambiguity in sketches (and 'sketchiness' that shows up in representations other than actual sketches). He points to great ideas on how the ambiguity leads to new interpretations (re-interpretation if you are the one who made it) because you have to fill in the holes. He cites a broad set of references that discuss how this interaction with externalizations leads to ideas, rather than the externalizations just representing an idea that existed before becoming externalized. So, I found it interesting having just thought a lot about what Buxton was pointing to and then seeing this "pixel perfect mockup" stuff. I know there is a good role for both, and maybe the pixel perfect value has a lot to do with how Buxton discusses the skill of "reading" the sketch is at least as valuable as skill in making the sketch; i.e. the pixel perfect sketch can be shown to those that may not have the "reading" skill as refined. Joel ________________________________________________________________ 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
