interaction design造句

Purposeful interaction design

Architectural patterns and interaction design

The interaction design advances that contributed were:

Later in the chapter we discuss how to coordinate interaction design with industrial design.

This newly available ability to deliver complex behavior in a browser demands application-quality interaction design.

It requires a strong collaboration with the disciplines of interaction design, software development, and product management.

Process, patterns, and principles are necessary, but not sufficient, for a successful interaction design project.

This is a significant conflict of interest that good interaction design can help resolve.

One important difference between interaction design patterns and architectural design patterns is the concern of interaction design patterns not only with structure and organization of elements but also with dynamic behaviors and changes in elements in response to user activity.

Design principles operate at several levels of granularity, ranging from the general practice of interaction design down to the specifics of interface design.

We typically coordinate our visual and interaction design efforts so this step is performed close to the end of the interaction framework, when the design has begun to stabilize and there is sufficient specific detail to reflect the visual style.

Jana Carrey is a freelance photographic artist, visual anthropologist, writer, interaction design studio manager and ethnographic researcher.

As we discussed in Chapter 13, the use of metaphor in interaction design can be severely limiting.

In our practice, we’ve come to recognize that visual interface design is a critical and unique discipline, and it must be conducted in concert with interaction design and industrial design.

Designing for the informational portion requires information architecture to create a strong organizational structure, whereas designing for the application portion requires interaction design to define critical behaviors.

As we discussed in Chapter 21, the hallmark of bad interaction design is a user interface that consists primarily of control-laden modal dialog boxes.

If interaction design is done in a vacuum, the product team will lack common direction and the expertise and intelligence of its members will not provide benefit to the design.

Elegance is defined in the dictionary as both “gracefulness and restrained beauty of style” and “scientific precision, neatness, and simplicity.” We believe that elegance in design, or at least interaction design, incorporates both of these ideals.

If you have limited time and resources to deal with interaction design issues, we recommend leaving modeless dialog boxes pretty much the way they are, but adopting two guiding principles and applying them consistently to all modeless dialog boxes.

Over the years, when interaction designers ask me which design technique works best, I have assured them that this is not so much a battle of technique as it is a struggle for power.

In our experience, the biggest shortcoming of traditional use cases as a basis for interaction design is their tendency to treat all possible user interactions as equally likely and important.

In the course of an interaction design project, it’s often desirable to evaluate how well you’ve hit the mark by going beyond your personas and validation scenarios to put your solutions in front of actual users.

As we’ve discussed, interaction design needs input from and has implications for business decision makers, marketers, technologists, business analysts, and a potentially huge cast of product fabrication, quality assurance, support, and installation people, among others.

Unlike software running on a computer, which has the luxury of being fairly immersive if need be, interaction design for mobile and public contexts requires special attention to creating an experience that coexists with the noise and activity of the real world happening all around the product.

Much as economists create models to describe the behavior of markets, and physicists create models to describe the behavior of particles, we have found that using our research to create descriptive models of our users is a uniquely powerful tool for interaction design.

This kind of thinking is useful to help designers look outside the box. Magical solutions obviously won’t suffice, but figuring out creative ways to technically accomplish interactions that are as close to magical solutions as possible (from the personas’ perspective) is the essence of great interaction design.

In particular, we’d to highlight three important groups with which interaction designers should collaborate.

We briefly discussed the relationship between visual, industrial, and interaction designers in Chapters 4–7.

The interaction designer must train himself to hear sour notes in the orchestration of software interaction. It is vital that all the elements in an interface work coherently together towards a single goal.

Another big advantage is that interaction designers won’t have to incorporate clumsy file system awareness into their products.

Especially for handhelds, close collaboration among interaction designers, industrial designers, programmers, and mechanical engineers is a real necessity.

We’ve found that to be effective, interaction designers must ultimately assume considerable responsibility for orchestrating a fine balance between the numerous forces pushing and pulling on a product.

That's what is going to the interaction designer's mind because that's a huge issue the industrial designer, meanwhile, is looking at huh, what's the Angle of that display?