[Webpro] hello world?

[Pabini Gabriel-Petit]

Tony Crockford said:
[This list] is more
> focused on the design aspects of webdesign," which I took to mean the
> visual elements, as that's the way "design" is normally used.

***I hope this limited definition of won't turn out to be true. Of course,
visual design is an important part of Web design, so I hope this list will
attract visual designers, but "design" should encompass interaction design
and information architecture as well--that is to say, user experience
design, to use an all-encompassing term.

> I do, however, struggle with the common belief that its possible to
> separate visual design from website design and I don't think I'm alone in
> this.  This is a good article on that topic, maybe we could discuss it
> here and get a Webpro definition of "design":
>
>
http://www.digital-web.com/columns/artofinteraction/the_designer_is_dead.shtml
>
> Do we think it's possible to possess *all* the skills required for web
> design?  or should we specialise in either the sciences or the arts and
> work in teams?

***I am a user experience architect, which means my work encompasses all
aspects of software design--whether for desktop software or the Web. So,
yes, it is possible to possess all of the requisite skills--though not
common. The area in which I am most highly skilled and experienced is
interaction design. However, my schooling was in visual design. Since my
background is predominantly in desktop software, I personally prefer to work
on interaction design and visual design concurrently. (There is so much
interaction between these two types of design.) However, that is not the Web
way. Typically, on Web development teams, interaction design and wireframes
come first; visual design later. Of course, the wireframes dictate the page
layouts, which are a big part of visual design.

I think anyone working on a Web development team should have a certain level
of technical sophistication. Designers need to understand the technical
constraints of the Web. I am not a developer, but am currently developing my
own Web site. I'm sure this learning experience will serve me well on future
Web design projects.

Regarding the article "Art of Interaction", by Didier P. Hilhorst:
I strongly disagree with the author's opening premise. Visual design
definitely does not come before usability. Good visual design is part of
what makes a Web site usable. Many principles of visual design regarding
layout and typography exist for the sake of usability--specifically,
scanability, readability, and legibility. For example, the skillful use of
negative space on a Web page contributes to both aesthetics and usability.
Branding is important to establishing sense of place, which helps prevent
users from becoming lost in hyperspace--thus, improving usability. Pure
aesthetics are important, but definitely in the eye of the beholder. What is
attractive to one may not be to another.

According to the tenets of architecture and interior design, form does
indeed follow function. Software design and architecture have much in
common. Both disciplines strive to provide comfortable, usable work and
living spaces. Web site design also has much in common with the design of
publications, from which it derives many of its principles and guidelines.
Here again, form follows function.

However, I think the author has set up a bit of a straw man. Highly skilled
user experience and interaction designers fully understand the role that
visual design plays. (Of course, there are a lot of Web pages out there that
are designed by engineers, without regard to either usability or
aesthetics.)

The author's statement that "good design is, de facto, usable" is probably
true to the extent that the designer resists self-indulgence. The typical
Web site is not an arena for personal creative expression or should not be.
When it is, form often impairs function.

I do agree with the author's statement that aethetics affect perceived ease
of use. However, perceived ease of use can be in direct contradiction with
actual usability.

The author has provided some good examples of how attractive visual elements
can contribute to the actual usability of a Web page. These elements don't
exist purely for the sake of aethetics. They exist to communicate the
functionality of a Web page to its users.

The bottom line... Both usability and aesthetics are important, but
usability is the foundation on which we should build Web pages. Aethetics
serve usability.

Pabini
________________________________________

Pabini Gabriel-Petit
Principal & User Experience Architect
Spirit Softworks
www.spiritsoftworks.com