On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Dave Katten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this thread is starting to show some salient aspects about > metaphor > that warrant some discussion, namely what is a metaphor and when is one > appropriate. I don't think the language metaphor for UE disciplines is too far fetched, because it is embodied -- uses the same grammar, we use for language. We experience designed (and natural) systems by communicating with them. The communication has structure, defined largely by our evolved brain -- the experience is embodied, to paraphrase Lakoff and Chomsky (they were writing about language, of course). Different disciplines in UE field put emphasis on distinct parts of the communication (objects, actions, attributes). This schema, in my mind, reflects specialization of user experience disciplines, which, in turn, reflect the specialization in our minds, rather well: Content Strategists are nouns, IAs is the grammar, IxD is the verbs, Visual is the adjectives, Experience Architects are the poets.... Thanks, Will, for expanding the schema. Disclaimer: as with any classification, the boundaries are fuzzy. -- Oleh Kovalchuke Interaction Design is design of time http://www.tangospring.com/IxDtopicWhatIsInteractionDesign.htm On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Dave Katten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think this thread is starting to show some salient aspects about > metaphor > that warrant some discussion, namely what is a metaphor and when is one > appropriate. > > In my view, there are two kinds of metaphors: experiential and > explanatory. > Experiential metaphors are practically transparent - we use them without > even thinking about them when we talk about one domain as another. My > favorite example is POLITICS IS WAR - there are campaigns, one party > attacks > another, such a position is indefensible, what is their strategy for the > ground game, etc. The way Westerners practice politics is talked about > (and > to an extent, experienced) the same way they practice war. > > The explanatory type is transient and (occasionally) forced. It is used to > make a specific point about how one element in some domain (like UE > architect) is kinda sorta like an element in another domain (like film > directing). Yes, I can see some connections, but the systematicity of an > experiential domain simply isn't there. > > That isn't to say "pshaw" to the whole thread - it's fun to try and link > things together. But I think this opens up a larger topic about the place > of > metaphor in interaction design. I seem to recall a number of works that > suggest leveraging metaphors in interaction, such as the "cut, copy, > paste" > of photocopying, which mapped to word processors, which in turn was > generalized to OSs in general. That to me seems like a great experiential > metaphor because users are manipulating things in the same way for the > same > purpose. But then I imagine some eager IxDers trying to ram every > interface > and every vocabulary item into a metaphor that just doesn't fit. > > I would argue that interaction designers should really think about how > they > choose and deploy metaphors and guard against "forcing" explanatory > metaphors. As one of my friends says "Just because you can do it, it > doesn't > mean you can do it for a living". In this case, "just because you can > imagine a metaphor doesn't mean the metaphor will make sense to your > users". > > Out of curiosity, has anyone out there read Lakoff & Johnson's "Metaphors > we > live by"? > > Best, > dave katten > > > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:58 PM, W Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Grip would be analogous to IT support for the team, I guess. > > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Oleh Kovalchuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > We didn't have slides. Instead the presentation served as a seed for > > > audience discussion (we try to encourage audience participation, hence > > all > > > the interesting metaphors). > > > > > > As far as I understand, Project Manager analogous to Producer. Key > Grip? > > I > > > wonder myself... > > > > > > Another good book on film, which is relevant to user experience > design, > > is > > > Jon Boorstin's "The Hollywood Eye. What makes movies work." > > > > > > Do come to our next meetup on May 14th :) -- it will be as exciting. > > Simon > > > Hill of SpireMedia will cover user experience research and how it > > translates > > > into online experience. > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > 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 > ________________________________________________________________ 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
