IxDA project: contributing Design to a real service

15 Sep 2007 - 4:52pm
7 years ago
21 replies
550 reads
Juhan Sonin
2003

IxDA should be diving into the Design game by contributing to and
evolving a real service. A project that:
1) that needs design help,
2) is open source so the world at large can benefit and contribute,
3) by participating and evolving the design, promotes IxDA and Design
in general,
4) gets us excited.

Let's work on something REAL... a service that begs for great design
and doesn't have it.

Why not attack Dojo or Blueprint or a GUI installer for JBOSS or
dramatically improving the UI on SugarCRM? Pushing UI design on a
javascript framework (like Dojo and many others) has real
consequences for everyday developers and designers. Our contribution
should be design and code; design by itself isn't as powerful. Code
is [still] law.

Let's start small and prototype like crazy to make sure we can be
successful.

?

-Juhan

Comments

15 Sep 2007 - 9:13pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Hi Juhan,
I've been thinking a lot about this, and have proposed something to
the board that the IxDA NYC local group is going to make real. That
is, as has been discussed on this list before, the NYC IxDA group is
going to have a multi-week studio class. The basis of the studio
class (as it stands now and I'm hoping won't change) is for
students to work on the following:
1) Design a community of practice solution for IxDA.
2) Design an eco-system of an open source project that this CoP
solution is built on, that from the ground up is design-centric.

Then the course will be the beginning of an OSS project, that will be
managed by the IxDA board to maintain its goals.

Any organization can take the output of the OSS project and use, but
the IxDA would retain control just like Mozilla, Apache, Lazslo and
other OSS projects out there.

Anyway, that is the idea at this point.

The other proejcts you are speaking about IMHO have way too much
baggage for an organization like ours to support and further (and
this is where I'm sure the controversy will begin), until we
actually re-design OSS so that a design/developer collaborative
environment is part of its DNA.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

15 Sep 2007 - 11:54pm
Juhan Sonin
2003

Sounds like the NYC group is ahead of the game. Fantastic.

I have no idea what #1 or #2 mean. Community of practice, like
competencies and governance, reek of corporate blather rather than
actually doing something. (Take this with a grain of salt.)

Let's start small. Take on one or two components in Dojo (or the
service of choice) and make them AMAZING. Build street cred in the
developer community and build momentum through targeted,
well-managed, fabulously executed and coded design in a real OS
project. Unless we have a killer idea, let's join an in-progress
project. I agree that tackling a monster OS project is not our first,
second, or fifth step. We also need to cultivate the idea that
designers need to lead projects; this is THE way to propagate the
Design Word.... rather than just lecturing from the mount (or a
listserv).

Dave, what exactly is the NYC group tackling? Is this a NYC thing or
can all IxDA'ers across planet earth participate?

-Juhan

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 6:46am
Lisa Harper
2007

> We also need to cultivate the idea that
> designers need to lead projects; this is THE way to propagate the
> Design Word.... rather than just lecturing from the mount (or a
> listserv).
>
> -Juhan
I'm all over this, Juhan, as you might imagine ;-).

If interaction designers are truly part of the development team -- and
leading the charge for concept development -- they are well-situated
(in terms of skills and knowledge) as technical leads.

Heretical thought or not, it seems to me that interaction designers
spring from the gap where usability engineers have traditionally been
seated. But with technical skills and savvy, they change the dynamics
of design and development on the development team such that they have
the perfect mix of skills to lead a project from it's initiation.They
should no longer be relegated to the latter phases of product
development where the job is to fix problems after a product has been
delivered, but at project inception in order to carve the path for the
entire technical team. In any case, I've found this to work well.

Your idea of embracing the open source movement is a wonderful idea!

Lisa Harper
MITRE

16 Sep 2007 - 8:30am
Dave Malouf
2005

Juhan,

First, everyone should feel encouraged to take on the projects that
most interest them OSS or private, or whatever. There are people in
this community who have made great contributions to some existing
projects. So if people are interested in Dojo or SUGAR or whatever,
that is great. Go for it.

To answer some questions and since the Board has not accepted even my
original proposal, please be clear that at best I'm speaking for what
we are doing in NYC but mostly I'm speaking for myself.

1. the concept of "gaining cred" in the developer community to me
is a flaw in your plan. It really should be the other way around. the
Developer community has isolated itself and alienated designers
through their methods. It is and exclusionary process they have
created and if anything they need to earn some cred (or at least good
faith) within our community. Which is why one of the pieces of this
project is to actually re-design OSS to be collaborative from the get
go instead of relying on the "contribution of code" model of value
which is inherently designer exclusionary and at best leaves us at
their whim.

2. Community of Practice is the means of creating knowledge from a
collection of people for the advancement of a shared interest by
those people. Yes, it is vague, but in essence it is what IxDA is all
about. Please look at our web site's about page and you can see where
we are trying to head. It is about creating connections between
previously disparate knowledge and information sources, as well as
creating systems of linking relationship of people and create a means
of gaging people's credibility around their contributions.

In a way OSS projects are a community of practice, but usually CoP
are much bigger than a single project.

As for what NYC is doing:
We are using this idea of CoP for IxDA as a design project. The idea
is to kick this off, document it in a public space and see where it
goes. Until the infrastructure for managing the project is in place
which will be one of the primary duties of the NYC group and a plan
is approved by the board I don't see how others will be able to
contribute. But once that is in place, the idea is that everyone
throughout the galaxy will be able to contribute to the project.

Like almost every OSS project, there needs to be a beginning that
defines the parameters of the project before it can really open up.

--dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 8:42am
SemanticWill
2007

Some of this bespeaks the web-centric problem that I think all IxDA people
should be aware. I actually had to Google most of the names of things that
Juhan mentioned, like DOJO, Sugar, etc. Many - many - IxD professionals are
not in the web world, some working on thick installed, rich clients - others
on hardware and devices built with software C++ or Objective C and Cocoa.

My humble opinion - i think there are a number of great things we can do -
design/develop efforts for the IxDA.org site that perhaps we can focus more
energy at home and then local chapters or virtual chapters could break out
and work together as a community or practice (physical or virtual), to
volunteer on specific areas of interest.
BTW: I am warming to the concept of Community of Practice.

-Will

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 06:30:39, dave malouf <dave at ixda.org> wrote:
>
> Juhan,
>
> First, everyone should feel encouraged to take on the projects that
> most interest them OSS or private, or whatever. There are people in
> this community who have made great contributions to some existing
> projects. So if people are interested in or SUGAR or whatever,
> that is great. Go for it.
>
> To answer some questions and since the Board has not accepted even my
> original proposal, please be clear that at best I'm speaking for what
> we are doing in NYC but mostly I'm speaking for myself.
>
> 1. the concept of "gaining cred" in the developer community to me
> is a flaw in your plan. It really should be the other way around. the
> Developer community has isolated itself and alienated designers
> through their methods. It is and exclusionary process they have
> created and if anything they need to earn some cred (or at least good
> faith) within our community. Which is why one of the pieces of this
> project is to actually re-design OSS to be collaborative from the get
> go instead of relying on the "contribution of code" model of value
> which is inherently designer exclusionary and at best leaves us at
> their whim.
>
> 2. Community of Practice is the means of creating knowledge from a
> collection of people for the advancement of a shared interest by
> those people. Yes, it is vague, but in essence it is what IxDA is all
> about. Please look at our web site's about page and you can see where
> we are trying to head. It is about creating connections between
> previously disparate knowledge and information sources, as well as
> creating systems of linking relationship of people and create a means
> of gaging people's credibility around their contributions.
>
> In a way OSS projects are a community of practice, but usually CoP
> are much bigger than a single project.
>
> As for what NYC is doing:
> We are using this idea of CoP for IxDA as a design project. The idea
> is to kick this off, document it in a public space and see where it
> goes. Until the infrastructure for managing the project is in place
> which will be one of the primary duties of the NYC group and a plan
> is approved by the board I don't see how others will be able to
> contribute. But once that is in place, the idea is that everyone
> throughout the galaxy will be able to contribute to the project.
>
> Like almost every OSS project, there needs to be a beginning that
> defines the parameters of the project before it can really open up.
>
> --dave
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the improved ixda.org
> http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help
> Unsubscribe ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> Questions .................. list at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org
>

--
~ we

-------------------------------------
n: will evans
t: user experience architect
e: wkevans4 at gmail.com

-------------------------------------

16 Sep 2007 - 9:05am
Mark Schraad
2006

Hi Dave,

This is great point, one which I have been leaning towards, but just
short of expressing. I wonder if the the manifesto is not so much a
response to a dysfunctional organizational culture (as Alan Cooper
has stated) but a response to a democratized technology. Is is just a
coincidence that it occurred at a point where code was shifting from
top secret compiler mode to a simpler scripting model that could be
used on the web? Putting capable but simpler tools in the hands of
nearly everybody, with a built in distribution mechanism would rock
even the most sturdy of industries.

Back to what you wrote, this is an important perspective that should
be expanded upon and put into a broader conversation. Not sure if
Boxes and Arrows is the best venue, but it might be a first step.

Mark

On Sep 16, 2007, at 2:30 AM, dave malouf wrote:

> 1. the concept of "gaining cred" in the developer community to me
> is a flaw in your plan. It really should be the other way around. the
> Developer community has isolated itself and alienated designers
> through their methods. It is and exclusionary process they have
> created and if anything they need to earn some cred (or at least good
> faith) within our community. Which is why one of the pieces of this
> project is to actually re-design OSS to be collaborative from the get
> go instead of relying on the "contribution of code" model of value
> which is inherently designer exclusionary and at best leaves us at
> their whim.

16 Sep 2007 - 9:08am
.pauric
2006

David: "2) Design an eco-system of an open source project that this
CoP solution is built on, that from the ground up is
design-centric."

Addressing the design/implmentation imbalance is one issue of OSS
projects. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on the management
structure that will succeed driving a volunteer workforce. In my mind,
key to an effective eco-system is a respective yet authoritative
reporting structure.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 9:29am
SemanticWill
2007

On the note that Pauric eccos based on Dave's statement - has anyone else
read "Dreaming in Code" about the Chandler Open Source project?

>From everything that I have read - about the successes of various open
source projects such as Linux is exactly what Pauric brings up - an
authoritative/authoritarian structure that is open for people to contribute.
Wow - okay - read the book, authoritarian sounds harsh - but successful
projects, especially democratic/open volunteer ones - tend to have 1 or 2
passionate and commited people at the top that make all decisions, thinking
about Stallman, Torvalds, etc.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:08:03, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David: "2) Design an eco-system of an open source project that this
> CoP solution is built on, that from the ground up is
> design-centric."
>
> Addressing the design/implmentation imbalance is one issue of OSS
> projects. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on the management
> structure that will succeed driving a volunteer workforce. In my mind,
> key to an effective eco-system is a respective yet authoritative
> reporting structure.
>
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the improved ixda.org
> http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help
> Unsubscribe ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> Questions .................. list at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org
>

--
~ we

-------------------------------------
n: will evans
t: user experience architect
e: wkevans4 at gmail.com

-------------------------------------

16 Sep 2007 - 10:21am
Taneem Talukdar
2005

Juhan, this is a great idea.

I'm curious about how you can apply interaction design to Dojo or Prototype.
Do you mean you want to change how the API is designed for access from
developer users - i.e. how functions are called and organized etc? If so,
that's a really interesting place to work in and quite unconventional. I
would definitely be interested in seeing where that goes. More generally, I
don't think interaction designers have ever been involved in the design of
programming languages. If you're thinking about a UI on top of a JS library,
I am not certain what the benefit is -- can you please elaborate?

A related but more conventional possibility would be to design a
configuration interface for Apache. From what I've seen, this is one of the
increasingly key advantages that MS IIS has over Apache (a point and click
configuration interface vs. changing parameters in a textfile). The
challenge here is to create an effective cross-platform GUI to a pretty
powerful piece of software without "dumbing it down" as MS has been accused
in the past with IIS (not as much anymore with IIS 6). I like this idea
because it's small in scope and a way to "get started".

The other advantage of doing this is that you can code the interface,
package it with Apache, PHP and mySQL and create your own release completely
independently, and then establish credibility as people start to download
it. One of the most popular Apache packages for developers is WAMP right
now, only because the guy making it took a little time to design a better
interface to the tools.

The only model for success in OSS is the one where someone actually goes out
and takes the initiative to start a project. Grand plans to change how the
entire OSS community operates are unlikely to get anywhere, at least from
what I've seen in the past 7 or 8 years. OSS is well known for having a low
tolerance for rhetoric.

Cheers,

Taneem Talukdar

On 9/16/07, W Evans <wkevans4 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On the note that Pauric eccos based on Dave's statement - has anyone else
> read "Dreaming in Code" about the Chandler Open Source project?
>
> >From everything that I have read - about the successes of various open
> source projects such as Linux is exactly what Pauric brings up - an
> authoritative/authoritarian structure that is open for people to
> contribute.
> Wow - okay - read the book, authoritarian sounds harsh - but successful
> projects, especially democratic/open volunteer ones - tend to have 1 or 2
> passionate and commited people at the top that make all decisions,
> thinking
> about Stallman, Torvalds, etc.
>
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:08:03, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > David: "2) Design an eco-system of an open source project that this
> > CoP solution is built on, that from the ground up is
> > design-centric."
> >
> > Addressing the design/implmentation imbalance is one issue of OSS
> > projects. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on the management
> > structure that will succeed driving a volunteer workforce. In my mind,
> > key to an effective eco-system is a respective yet authoritative
> > reporting structure.
> >
> >
> >
> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> > Posted from the improved ixda.org
> > http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> > List Guidelines ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines
> > List Help .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help
> > Unsubscribe ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> > Questions .................. list at ixda.org
> > Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ~ we
>
> -------------------------------------
> n: will evans
> t: user experience architect
> e: wkevans4 at gmail.com
>
> -------------------------------------
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> List Guidelines ............ http://beta.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://beta.ixda.org/help
> Unsubscribe ................ http://beta.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> Questions .................. list at ixda.org
> Home ....................... http://beta.ixda.org
>

16 Sep 2007 - 12:45pm
Dave Malouf
2005

HI Taneem,
I agree that going into existing well established projects and
expecting to change their culture is ludicrous. What I'm proposing
(for that very reason) is to start a project where even the
"culture" of contribution is designed from scratch.

To Pauric, I think I alluded to the need for a strong central vision
and organizing body that would actually report under the IxDA board
structure (this might also address Mark's point as well).

Other than that, I think the design team of the studio class in NYC
will be making a big proposal about how this should work. To me it is
one of the most important parts of the design project itself.

Personally, I could see a more formalized institution like CMU or IIT
take this project on with better detail and more support and
collaborate with other bodies within the school. Doing this over 8
weeks probably won't be enough to get us where we need to be other
than to model examples that we can iterate on moving forward.

-- dave

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 6:05pm
Dave Malouf
2005

On 9/16/07, W Evans <wkevans4 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Some of this bespeaks the web-centric problem that I think all IxDA people
> should be aware. I actually had to Google most of the names of things that
> Juhan mentioned, like DOJO, Sugar, etc. Many - many - IxD professionals are
> not in the web world, some working on thick installed, rich clients - others
> on hardware and devices built with software C++ or Objective C and Cocoa.

Will this is a great point and one of the projects I think NYC was
thinking of doing work in and for was the open moko celephone project.
This is definitely an interesting one.

openmoko.org

-- dave

--
David Malouf
http://synapticburn.com/
http://ixda.org/
http://motorola.com/

16 Sep 2007 - 7:01pm
Juhan Sonin
2003

Whether you're an engineer or designer, you need to build trust when
joining a team, project, or company. In any OS project, one doesn't
get immediate commit rights; you need to earn the trust of the
community and establish credibility. Blame ourselves for the lack of
service street cred, not the engineers. Out of the 300,000 open
source solutions, there are no Design OS projects that have the
global impact such as Apache, JBOSS, Eclipse, Linux, etc. Design is
way behind engineering in the practice of Open Source. Again, code is
law. And the cherry on top: design-only designers are dinosaurs (like
myself). Evolve or parish.

Fat clients, physical devices, architecture, hardware are all great
outlets in need of Open Source Design. By initially selecting a web
service, it lowers the barrier of entry for participants, we can
follow well established OS 'rules', and we can potentially have a
larger impact. I'm not vested in any one medium: let's just find
the right project. As Teneem suggested, a config UI for Apache has
legs.

Most designers have not participated in the open source world. We
need to get our hands dirty and learn the OS ropes before creating
The Design Community Solution for OSS. Passing this task off to an
academic institution = 1) we can't handle it and 2) let's not do
anything with immediacy and impact.

Where are the design-oriented TechShops, Ignites, Make Faires or Dev
Houses? The one day, all day, make/prototype something a la barn
raising. This could be a first step...

I'm advocating DOING rather than talking.

-Juhan

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 8:54pm
Mark Schraad
2006

Juhan,

I would e curious to understand how much more 'open' you can expect
design to be. The methods and tools are all out there published and
available for use. The discussion of process is ongoing, and almost
all designers publish portfolios and case studies on a regular basis.
I know of no designers that are not willing to share these in either
conversations or in presentation format. Maybe you could help by
explaining your expectations of design's contribution to open source.

As for being dinosaurs, maybe I am old school, but I do not expect
designers to right great code. If they can produce prototypes, great.
Nor do I expect developers to design the UI, the visuals or fine tune
the experience. Obviously there are those that can do both, but they
are rare. Almost every project these days is collaborative so I would
rather have deep vertical expertise than people that can do a lot of
things marginally. Specific to the web, in the late 90's web dev was
much simpler and designers could manage needs ranging from IA to UI,
visual and coding. These days coding for the net is so much more
complex. The design group I work in provides code for clarification,
but we do not really expect it to be used in the final ap.

Mark

On Sep 16, 2007, at 8:01 PM, Juhan Sonin wrote:

> Whether you're an engineer or designer, you need to build trust when
> joining a team, project, or company. In any OS project, one doesn't
> get immediate commit rights; you need to earn the trust of the
> community and establish credibility. Blame ourselves for the lack of
> service street cred, not the engineers. Out of the 300,000 open
> source solutions, there are no Design OS projects that have the
> global impact such as Apache, JBOSS, Eclipse, Linux, etc. Design is
> way behind engineering in the practice of Open Source. Again, code is
> law. And the cherry on top: design-only designers are dinosaurs (like
> myself). Evolve or parish.
>
> Fat clients, physical devices, architecture, hardware are all great
> outlets in need of Open Source Design. By initially selecting a web
> service, it lowers the barrier of entry for participants, we can
> follow well established OS 'rules', and we can potentially have a
> larger impact. I'm not vested in any one medium: let's just find
> the right project. As Teneem suggested, a config UI for Apache has
> legs.
>
> Most designers have not participated in the open source world. We
> need to get our hands dirty and learn the OS ropes before creating
> The Design Community Solution for OSS. Passing this task off to an
> academic institution = 1) we can't handle it and 2) let's not do
> anything with immediacy and impact.
>
> Where are the design-oriented TechShops, Ignites, Make Faires or Dev
> Houses? The one day, all day, make/prototype something a la barn
> raising. This could be a first step...
>
> I'm advocating DOING rather than talking.
>
> -Juhan
>

16 Sep 2007 - 9:27pm
.pauric
2006

Juhan: "design-only designers are dinosaurs"

I understand what you're saying, but, I've found that OS projects
recognize the value add of UCD, its just that its usually too late to
repair the damage when they call for design help.

I firmly believe the core issue of the design/implementation
imbalance in OSS development is down to the psychological make-up of
the majority of people drawn in to OS. Coders driven by a desire to
build stuff they find interesting, crack problems that challenge them
and generally flip the bird to the whole copyright/patent/money making
mentality.

David "re-design OSS to be collaborative from the get go instead of
relying on the "contribution of code" model"

Yes, but how are you going to motivate coders? You dont have the
$30M/year google throws at the Mozilla foundation. I disagree with
the statement "the Developer community has isolated itself and
alienated designers through their methods. It is an exclusionary
process they have created and if anything they need to earn some cred
(or at least good faith) within our community."

Way to go winning people over to your pov.

The OS community has grown organically, it is the way it is not
because of some deliberate isolationist mindset, but because of the
people the movement attracts. If designers we're so altruistically
minded then this page would look a little different, no?
http://www.interactivegestures.com/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges

Designers like Mr Saffer are few and far between.

Yes Juhan, Designers are nothing without implementation. Yes David,
the OSS development model is UCD/GCD incompatible.. The key to
addressing the issues you both highlight is understanding 3 M's
1)How to manage: Respectful yet authoritative.
2)The different mental make up of contributers: Know your audience.
3)How to motivate them: Coders get kudos for delivering code,
Designers... (o;

Simply focusing on the 'right project' or 'doing instead of
talking' or 'setting and example' is, in my mind, not going to be
enough to change a development eco-system that is the way it is
because thats the way its inhabitants like to work.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

16 Sep 2007 - 9:32pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Juhan,

"code is law" to me is the exclusionary piece and I TOTALY disagree
w/ the dinosaur bit. While prototyping is a requirement, coding is
not. I also disagree w/ your assessments in general.

But putting that aside, are you saying that starting a project from
scratch that tries to REDEFINE an OSS project so that collaboration
instead of contribution is how we move forward through a project is
not a good idea?

- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

17 Sep 2007 - 7:02am
Dave Malouf
2005

Pauric, crossing each other in the delay that is IxDA's web site. ;)

I don't think what has occurred in OSS is purposeful, but just like
I have been charged with being exclusionary in the ways that IxDA has
grown organically, sometimes organic growth leads to unintended
consequences.

But putting all that aside, the project the NYC group is going to do
is to design. Ergo, through research and modeling they will design
the eco-system of the OSS project we build our CoP on.

I do not believe that maintaining the status quo is the answer, nor
do I believe trying to fix the current system within existing
projects by forcing designers to code is the answer either.

Creating a model for change that in and of itself will be a useful
direction.

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

17 Sep 2007 - 8:02am
.pauric
2006

Could not agree with you more. So, I may have misunderstood the scope
of your intent.

I'm not entirely clear on what the ideal model will be. But.. a
scan of the open positions on sourceforge, specifically the 'Project
Manager' positions
http://sourceforge.net/people/

Leaves me thinking there's need for a new role otherwise covered by
gate reviews in our world.

Something/someone that enforces due process and maintains focus.

cheers -p

p.s. other points to note on sourceforge is the description of UI
roles and the general ratio of roles. I think a new model could
follow a corp model of defined resource allocation.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

17 Sep 2007 - 11:14am
Adrian Howard
2005

On 15 Sep 2007, at 19:13, dave malouf wrote:
[snip]
> I've been thinking a lot about this, and have proposed something to
> the board that the IxDA NYC local group is going to make real. That
> is, as has been discussed on this list before, the NYC IxDA group is
> going to have a multi-week studio class. The basis of the studio
> class (as it stands now and I'm hoping won't change) is for
> students to work on the following:
> 1) Design a community of practice solution for IxDA.
> 2) Design an eco-system of an open source project that this CoP
> solution is built on, that from the ground up is design-centric.
>
> Then the course will be the beginning of an OSS project, that will be
> managed by the IxDA board to maintain its goals.
[snip]

If you've not come across them already you might want to chat to the
FLOSS Usability folk.

http://www.flossusability.org/

Adrian

17 Sep 2007 - 3:57pm
abby kirigin
2006

I agree with Juhan... developers have good ideas and they're out of
the gate implementing them. We need to keep up or be left behind.
The notion that design does all the work up-front, then developers
just 'make what they're told' is not going to cut it.

"Where are the design-oriented TechShops, Ignites, Make Faires or Dev
Houses? The one day, all day, make/prototype something a la barn
raising. This could be a first step..." (Juhan)

I was just thinking about this after Boston's dev house yesterday...
how can we designers get together and make something cool in 1 day?
Participants can draw and/or code (css/html/whatever)... Do we get a
'hand off' of the developer's stuff and get 1 day to make it flow
better, work better, look better, suggest other features, add/trim
etc?

Or, how about we work with one of these dev-groups and open a little
'design shop' (ixd solutions - 5 cents) at the next event?

*Abby

17 Sep 2007 - 6:47pm
Juhan Sonin
2003

Spot on Abby. 1 day design house coupled with a real OS service to
hook into.

Let's start with a few small prototypes in the open source world. We
can
1) learn the OS game,
2) engage with the dev community and be perceived as valuable and
integral OS citizens, and
3) provide amazing design service.

Let's hook up with the next Dev House if its a good fit. 1 day
design, dev, and prototype. Love it: I'm in.

We need to get our hands dirty in OS BEFORE creating and espousing
The OS Design Practice to the broader dev and design communities.
It's analogous to designing a UI with real data versus plugging in
'Lorem Ipsum' as default data. [Note: We should shun the use of
Lorem Ipsum (and similar methods) in comps.]

By participating in an active OS project, we live and learn what it
takes to be successful in OS. Then we craft a design-centric OS
project management and execution strategy that 1) drives our design
agenda and 2) allows us to operate more freely and with respect in
the OS world.

BARN RAISE!

-Juhan

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

17 Sep 2007 - 7:27pm
Dave Malouf
2005

hmmm? Barns are highly simple projects with set structures taht are
repeated with minimal change except for decoration over hundreds of
years of perfection of process. Hmmm? not exactly a great model IMHO.

No one so far has advocated "design up front". What has been
advocated is a re-design of OSS so that there is a REAL role for
design within projects, not one that is constantly second fiddle to
development.

It would seem though that you have some good energy and ideas about
going into existing projects and kickin' some ass. No one here is
discouraged from even leading such an effort within the IxDA
framework. You want to see it happen, Juhan. Show the community a
plan, so they can simmer on it, propose it to the board, and let's
make something happen.

All I'm talking about is a separate project that some other people
will be doing. There is LOTS of room here. The reason I've taken
this angle personally is that it is a project that no one else seems
to be doing (or at least doing well or to our current requirements)
and it is what the existing organization needs most. Maybe there is
another way to frame this project so that maybe it isn't even tied
to OSS out of the gate. The real project is more about designing a
CoP. The OSS piece is probably admittedly me putting too much up
front too quickly. Let the design team decide the best method for
doing so. For all I know our existing analysis has been flawed and
current solutions w/ minimal help can pull it off.

I love the idea of "just doing it", but to me like the whole new
IBM schpiel on that phrase doesn't understand that at some point you
have to ask the question, "Do what?" That is what design does. It
tells people what to implement, to do definition correctly SOME of it
has to happen concurrently to or before code.

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the improved ixda.org
http://beta.ixda.org/discuss?post=20494

Syndicate content Get the feed