Hi Joshua, > In this paper, I see at attempt to describe a rigorous system for > modeling and understanding user activity in the context of goals, > intentions, social context and all of the other higher-order > constructs that we say makes "good UCD" good. To me this places ACD > not on a continuum with UCD, but rather next to it--and simply working > to accomplish the same thing, but from a different perspective.
I Larry's paper, seems he integrated activity modeling with his usage centered design, which dosen't mean he come up with ACD, isnt it? (but from the other link, it seems he address the meaning of ACD), And UCD more like a claim for the goal, that we should design to meet user's needs and motivation; while ACD more like a advocate, that activity (analyze or similliar stuff) should be at the foundation of design practices. If so, there are not in parallel, aren't they? And ACD could be one way of UCD? Regards, Jarod ( not jared) -- http://designforuse.blogspot.com/ ________________________________________________________________ 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
