I say take it even one more level of abstraction out for the wireframe.  
Try to forget about pages and all things webbish.  Just think in terms 
of activities.  This lets you capture the system logic regardless of 
platform.  You should be able to imagine a wireframe as instructions to 
implement a system in any of a variety of environments, including 
paper.  No, you don't want to implement a paper-based system, but 
exploring from this point of view helps avoid pitfalls created by 
preconceptions.

Obviously, this means that I'm not at all interested in wireframe tools 
that imagine code generation or anything else related to a finished 
application.  My experience shows me that I can't even begin to draw 
intelligent conclusions about application architecture until I go 
through the prototyping process.  Then I put on my architect hat and 
start thinking about circuits, fuseactions, and fuses.

- Jeff

On Thursday, April 18, 2002, at 10:12 PM, BORKMAN Lee wrote:

> Hi Jerzy,
> �
> The WireFrameTool has no concept of Fuseboxes or nesting, or any other 
> architectural issue, and neither should you when you are wireframing.� 
> To get the most out of wireframing, just concentrate on documenting all 
> of the application's pages and all of the paths that connect them.� Put 
> all thought of architecture, of circuits and fuseactions out of your 
> head.� In fact, put all thought of Fusebox out of your head ;-)� All 
> you are doing with a wireframe is documenting pages and paths.� Pages 
> and Paths.
> �
> When you are finished doing the wireframing, AND the static 
> prototyping, then and only then should you begin to think about 
> Fusebox, Nested circuit, layouts, fuseactions, etc.� In fact, at that 
> point, you might decide to build the application using CFOBJECTS, or 
> Perl/CGI, etc.
> �
> Hope that helps, though I bet it doesn't ;-)
> �
> LeeBB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerzy Kalat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Hello,
> �
> When I am using wireframes editor, can I somehow pass information�of 
> nested fuseboxes?
> Or should I use this tool for functional specification for each fusebox 
> and later integrate them myself?
> �
>
> �
>
>

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to