DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings book. Happy reading DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF DeSForM 2007 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings Pocket Guide.

Here Daniel concluded by describing natural.

Previous Conferences and Procedings

Christian, who was sitting down, was more the concept of the traditional whiteboard. Figure 9 depicts the two designers taking on the role of the users. This episode of dramatization is interesting in that both designers cooperated in the drama; Christian followed Daniel, playing along with his initiatives. In this session the two designers cooperate and play along, using both gestures and voice in taking on the roles of users.

These short role-playing sessions evolve into a discussion of what target context the user would be in. They Figure 8. Moves hands slant it so it depends on if they are in a curve downwards so permanent like these or not. See Figures 27 below for a similar enactment later in the conversation.

Duplicate citations

Sits down and documents Interaction some of the ideas they have suggested. Design concept Excerpt 1. Group 1, Synthesis session. The tilting table 3 Again, this can be analysed using the five domains in the domain of structure one person works in of interaction design. This time, the enactment one corner while the other works in the other does not start in the domain of interaction.

At this stage they see the benefit of the Instead it starts in the domain of the design whiteboard, at which point they are back in the concept: the need to be able to work at the domain of the design concept. In their enactment they continue by moving from the domain of design concept to After this episode, Christian started a long the domain of functions and content when they enactment of a scenario involving several users identify functions such as move and draw.

In using the same smart-sketching whiteboard. Are they technology? Physically represents a tilting table Figures 2—5 4 Barbara Uhuh, those. The tilting table, continued Time 0. Structure Say you want to draw down in the corner. Okay, then you scenarios of this collective concept sketch there and I sketch here. Excerpt 4. You sketch there and I sketch here.

Research Overview: Interaction Design

Figure During this Improvised role play to discover consequences enactment he also discovers the need for new While they were playing around with the actual functionality identification of users. Christian was active, talking and exemplifying using These are two different kinds of content, created enactments, while Daniel did a lot of backchannelling using different functions. Sketches made with the which has not been transcribed fully as well as pencil can easily be deleted with an eraser, while trying to document and play around with some geometric objects rectangles, circles etc.

The progression of their design be erased with the eraser but have to be deleted ideas correlated well with their own experiences and using the menus. The designers saw this as a uses of the technology. Thus their experiences of serious problem, one they discussed thoroughly in using the smartboard, as well as their experiences of their final design presentation. In Figure 10, we see playing at being users with the existing smartboard, Daniel that enacts how he would erase an object drove the discussion forward.

After this session they using a smartboard eraser but he fails, because it refined the sketch Figure Looking at previous research as This discovery reminded them that they were well as our results, we have seen that they create not to evaluate the current system but rather to the dynamic aspects within a tight coupling of design a system to support collaborative design talk, graphical representations, and gestural tasks. They started to summarize this process in enactments. Excerpt 5, which provides further examples of their collaborative thinking- through process.

The sketches are important as tools for thought but it is the enactments and dramatizations that make During this excerpt they continued to try out the the sketches behave. Playing the role of a user, and design proposals. In contrast to earlier excerpts exploring the potential technology with the intent we see that earlier enactments of hypothetical of using it, helps designers explore the design and user activity have consequences in the domain of their design ideas, and also come up with new structure how functions and content should be ideas.

I see we want to have a large white surface on the whiteboard. We do not want a program mode; instead we want a large white surface, which works like a whiteboard but has interactivity in that you can make circles around menus, put in pictures, interface sketches, and interface elements and such. Christian Then we want several client Acts out the scenario Structure, possibilities.

We want it to run using the whiteboard.

Collection of conference publications

Then you want, I think, in this situation you want me to be able to work on the computer with this while you work here on the whiteboard and someone else with this. You want to work on the same document even if document is a ridiculous word, but in the same workbook so to speak. Daniel Exactly, right.

Christian But then should several persons work [Daniel writes and Design in parallel on the whiteboard like sketches] concept, we said? Excerpt 5.

  • Research Overview: Interaction Design – Medea.
  • Books & Issues;
  • Soviet field artillery in World War II : including its use by the German Wehrmacht.
  • Order Team Members;
  • Publication List.

Group 2; Synthesis session Shall we sum up? Christian sums up the discussion and Daniel documents it through sketches and words.

Book Subject Areas

Final sketch for presentation. Translation of the text in the sketch: Parallelism Several users work at the same time. Multimodal Dif- ferent views depending on modality computer, whiteboard, handheld computer. We think that early in their training themselves imaginatively into the target context designers must learn to acknowledge and even where their design solution might be used. As articulate these enactments as important ways such, gestures serve as a powerful means to to express themselves as they develop designs.

But gestures collaboration in front of whiteboards Lantz et al. They also help them take on the role of the artefact-in-use.

  • Labmark of Elif Ozcan Vieira;
  • Items where Subject is "Creative Arts and Design > Design Practice" - UAL Research Online.
  • Equity and Choice: An Essay in Economics and Applied Philosophy.
  • Neuromuscular Monitoring in Clinical Practice and Research.
  • Peer-reviewed journal articles.
  • Changes (The Dresden Files, Book 12)!
  • Proceedings of DeSForM 2006, Design & Semantics of Form and Movement?

We set out to analyse what it is that is expressed in kinetic gestures and enactments in more detail In the action context of the here and now, using this model. The graphic representations In Excerpts 1, 2, and 3 the participants perform their create a space, representing the target context, in enactments using gestures that mimic the actions of which designers can perform design moves Artman users in an interaction walkthrough.

The interaction et al. They do so by continuously modifying walkthrough is a gesture-driven enactment. In the graphic representations and by performing Excerpts 4 and 5 Christian and Daniel takes on gestural enactments to communicate and explore the role of two users and imagine themselves in a the dynamics of interaction.

  1. Ben Salem - Publications;
  2. Kinetic and Thermodynamic Lumping of Multicomponent Mixtures.
  3. Mental Health Legislation and Human Rights.
  4. US Army Combat Equipments 1910–88.
  5. Citations per year.
  6. DeSForM 2008 Design & Semantics of Form & Movement Proceedings;
  7. 1. Introduction;
  8. This process supports certain situation of use. Turning to the and artefacts. Our observations support the work five domains of interaction design we see that the by Robertson , who describes how gesture-driven interaction walkthroughs started designers use enactments to create and take part in out from the domain of interaction and drove the a time-based representation of process or activity designers to see that there were consequences that others can take part in see also Ochs et al.

    There are also secondary consequences for the other domains. Sketches can be thought of as states in a state The enactments in the form of improvised role play diagram; what the diagram lacks is the transitions. In consequences primarily for the domain of functions fact, the tilting table has two states: horizontal and content, and the domain of structure.

    In between those states there is a Secondarily, there are also consequences for the transition, which the women designers represented other domains. This can be interaction and presentation. The drama becomes a process domains. An example of that is when Anna and of collaborative reasoning, firmly anchored in a Barbara get the ideas of the functions tilt and pull situation of imagined use. Once again, this echoes based on their interaction walkthrough.