[Nettime-bold] RE: RHIZOME_RAW: GENERATION FLASH: Usability/Interaction

["Kanarinka" <kanarinka@ikatun.com>]

Why?

-----Original Message-----
From: John Klima [mailto:klima@echonyc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 2:49 PM
To: Kanarinka
Cc: 'Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]';
nettime-l@BBS.THING.NET; nettime@BBS.THING.NET; list@rhizome.org
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: GENERATION FLASH: Usability/Interaction



all good points but i just don't want to *have* think about the end
user, and i don't want a work to be assesed in terms of how well it
accomodates them.
j


Kanarinka wrote:
> 
> I agree that the "which end user" issue cannot be solved unless you
are
> doing extensive demographic research on your artwork (yuk). Even then,
> people designing software systems can never fully know the
expectations
> and actions of their end users. (I'm sure Microsoft has done lots of
> usability testing but I still find it incredibly *&^*&ing annoying to
> deal with images in Word docs)
> 
> My point earlier was that usability and interaction are different
things
> entirely. Usability is administrative and necessary, interaction
design
> is creative and necessary.
> 
> I think "form" in software/net design includes and is defined by the
> structure of the interaction which is in turn defined by focusing on
> why/how the user is going to approach, play, deal with, experience the
> software in the first place.
> 
> Form, in any given medium, stems from the formal properties of that
> medium. In 2D mediums you speak of form in terms of color,
composition,
> texture, etc.
> 
> The most distinguishing formal property of software from other mediums
> is that it allows for interaction, that it is rule-based, that it
allows
> the creation of a participatory, experiential environment, however you
> wanna say it.
> 
> So form in software can also apply to the composition of the visuals
on
> the screen and to the structure of any audio, etc., included in the
> piece, but in a software-driven artwork I would argue that the primary
> formal areas that one has to deal with are in the design of the rules
> for interaction...
> 
> ...and really that comes down to thinking about the person at the end
of
> the line who will be experiencing the work...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org] On Behalf
> Of John Klima
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:34 PM
> To: Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]
> Cc: nettime-l@BBS.THING.NET; nettime@BBS.THING.NET; list@rhizome.org
> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: GENERATION FLASH: Usability/Interaction
> 
> thinking about the end user has never been a *requirement* of art. and
> once you start thinking about the end user you get into all those
> diffic

_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold