I'm not saying that YOU think it is a failure. I'm saying I THINK generalizing is a failure thus far. But what I'm starting to see is that you aren't describing the way things ARE, but rather the way you want them to be in some ideal future. Is that right? I don't agree with it, but it clarifies for me. But again at the crux is that I see the discipline's intrinsic value as being wholly understood as separate and that education and practice can combine with other disciplines as makes sense for those specific contexts. You seem to want to dictate that they should ALWAYS be a combined whole. Is that right? there ain't nothing by big "D" design at both the discipline and practice level? (notice I'm asking, not trying to put words in your mouth.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=33500 ________________________________________________________________ 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
