|
|
Posted by Neredbojias on 10/02/34 12:01
Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 27 Jan 2008 02:06:00
GMT Kevin Scholl scribed:
> Neredbojias wrote:
>
>>> Kind of an important point to this entire discussion, if you think
>>> about it: one's definitions for some of the terms, and specificity
>>> thereof, can alter their application. I don't think we're so much
>>> saying different things, as approaching the question from different
>>> sides.
>>
>> I agree. In my mind, the design of a web site is the way which it
>> looks and works for the user. The engineering is how, via html, css,
>> et al., it is able to correctly work that way. I realize this is
>> arguable, but I believe that the markup and coding are essentially
>> engineering events guided by a mental conception (or drawing) of
>> design. However, the 2 terms are usually used familiarly and often
>> overlap in meaning.
>
> Hmmm ... let me ask you something. You just stated above that
> "...design of a web site is the way which it looks and works for the
> user."
>
> How then can you claim that the quote that started this line of
> discussion -- "Design is not just what it looks like and feels like.
> Design is how it works." -- is nonsense?
Job's statement implies the casual meaning of "works" whereas design can
only accurately contain the empirical meaning as illustrated in the first
part of my statement.
We are arguing semantics now, though.
If you believe design === engineering, fine. I don't. And I don't think I
care to belabor the issue much longer over the selective interpretation of
words and phrases.
--
Neredbojias
Riches are their own reward.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|