> Well of course we agree on most if this. And of course your general > thrust that a spiderable HTML underpinning is necessary for search > engines is right. But on the UI issue perhaps a slight divergence. > Perhaps you can do data and UI hand in hand, but my view is that you > dont know what your product should really be until you do some form of > UI that you can test against real users who can tell you whether you are > on the right track. This typically means building some form of UI, > perhaps a wireframe though this will give you less good feedback, > perhaps not even tied to a server but with mocked up data, for them to > experience. If you go right to a data model, then you dont know if the > content that you are trying to present is what the user really needs or > wants. So I am always focused on making sure that what I am doing is > what the user wants first. Once you know you are on the right track, > then you can build a data model to present the user what they need. Of > course this does not mean that great code cannot be written lots of > other ways!
Yup i think we can agree on that :) Btw, this just popped up in MXNA, very relevant to this discussion: http://www.randomusa.com/flash/index.php?entryID=1875 I just wished Adobe would actively approach and discuss the problem we are facing. I don't even ask for solutions. Maybe a technote that addresses this in some way would already be helpful. Cheers, Claus. -- claus wahlers côdeazur brasil http://codeazur.com.br/ http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/
