Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [XP] Re: When does interface design occur?

Expand Messages
  • Charlie Poole
    Hi Rick, Yes, in fact so do I. When I said I try to think about alternate UIs, I was thinking of Fit as one of them. I treat the acceptance test implementation
    Message 1 of 73 , Oct 16, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Rick,

      Yes, in fact so do I. When I said I try to think about alternate
      UIs, I was thinking of Fit as one of them. I treat the acceptance
      test implementation as a sort of alterate UI for the application.

      I just left Fit out so as not to muddy the waters. :-)

      Charlie

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      > [mailto:extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Mugridge
      > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 2:35 AM
      > To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [XP] Re: When does interface design occur?
      >
      > Hi Charlie,
      >
      > I do something similar to what you're describing, but instead
      > express them as storytests. Then they can be used to drive
      > development of the domain layer as well as understand and
      > discuss domain issues. I find this works well for more
      > complex domains, which is where much of my work is. I
      > attended Jeff Patton's session on usability at XP2007 and saw
      > examples where the domain is simple and well understood and I
      > can see that it makes sense to start with the UI. But in the
      > domains I work in, there is usally an evolution of the
      > ubiquitous language. And often changes arise from questions
      > from the programmers when they're noticing interesting
      > redundancy that has not been seen from the business perspective.
      >
      > I use DomainFixture (in FitLibrary) to express the
      > storytests. This uses nested tables and uses some similar
      > conventions to a UI (such as property-value pairs). It's a
      > picture of the domain objects and their associations and the
      > actions that are carried out on them.
      >
      > But some people are happier once they see a real UI. I prefer
      > to leave the real UI (and persistence) until the domain for
      > that part settles.
      > I've not found that the UI changes things especially at the
      > domain level, beyond where it spurs new ideas about what the
      > system should do.
      >
      > Cheers, Rick
      >
      > Charlie Poole wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi Adrian,
      > >
      > > > For me the development of the UI helps define the metaphors and
      > > > domain language that you develop to solve the customers problem.
      > > > Leaving it until the end can often mean you end up with
      > code that's
      > > > very hard to adapt to produce the best possible UI for the domain.
      > >
      > > I've been reading this thread in a bit of puzzlement. Your comment
      > > helped me to focus in on what has been bothering me, so
      > I'll chime in
      > > here, without any intent of disagreeing with you.
      > >
      > > I often work with customers in terms of a hypothetical UI when I'm
      > > trying to define what the underlying application needs to do.
      > > This might look like UI Design to someone who watched us,
      > since we do
      > > sketch various gui-like interfaces, but I don't think of it
      > that way.
      > > My goal is to figure out what the customer wants to do, not
      > produce a
      > > UI Design.
      > >
      > > Ultimately, there will be a UI, of course, and the work we did in
      > > surfacing the desired interaction with the application will
      > help a lot
      > > in designing that UI, but what we are doing initially is
      > (usually) not
      > > creating a UI - we are creating a visual language for talking about
      > > the application.
      > >
      > > I should add that I don't work this way with /all/ customers. Many
      > > folks are more comfortable with this approach, while others seem to
      > > give me more information when I use different terms. I
      > disagree with
      > > those who say that users can't think in any terms but the user
      > > interface - in fact, it seems like a disrespectful statement.
      > >
      > > The discussion I have been reading seems to have varied between the
      > > two separate (to my mind) activities of talking about the
      > UI as a way
      > > of understanding customer needs and actually designing a
      > UI. I think
      > > that's what was perplexing me.
      > >
      > > Charlie
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      > extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Charlie Poole
      Hi Rick, Yes, in fact so do I. When I said I try to think about alternate UIs, I was thinking of Fit as one of them. I treat the acceptance test implementation
      Message 73 of 73 , Oct 16, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Rick,

        Yes, in fact so do I. When I said I try to think about alternate
        UIs, I was thinking of Fit as one of them. I treat the acceptance
        test implementation as a sort of alterate UI for the application.

        I just left Fit out so as not to muddy the waters. :-)

        Charlie

        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Mugridge
        > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 2:35 AM
        > To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [XP] Re: When does interface design occur?
        >
        > Hi Charlie,
        >
        > I do something similar to what you're describing, but instead
        > express them as storytests. Then they can be used to drive
        > development of the domain layer as well as understand and
        > discuss domain issues. I find this works well for more
        > complex domains, which is where much of my work is. I
        > attended Jeff Patton's session on usability at XP2007 and saw
        > examples where the domain is simple and well understood and I
        > can see that it makes sense to start with the UI. But in the
        > domains I work in, there is usally an evolution of the
        > ubiquitous language. And often changes arise from questions
        > from the programmers when they're noticing interesting
        > redundancy that has not been seen from the business perspective.
        >
        > I use DomainFixture (in FitLibrary) to express the
        > storytests. This uses nested tables and uses some similar
        > conventions to a UI (such as property-value pairs). It's a
        > picture of the domain objects and their associations and the
        > actions that are carried out on them.
        >
        > But some people are happier once they see a real UI. I prefer
        > to leave the real UI (and persistence) until the domain for
        > that part settles.
        > I've not found that the UI changes things especially at the
        > domain level, beyond where it spurs new ideas about what the
        > system should do.
        >
        > Cheers, Rick
        >
        > Charlie Poole wrote:
        > >
        > > Hi Adrian,
        > >
        > > > For me the development of the UI helps define the metaphors and
        > > > domain language that you develop to solve the customers problem.
        > > > Leaving it until the end can often mean you end up with
        > code that's
        > > > very hard to adapt to produce the best possible UI for the domain.
        > >
        > > I've been reading this thread in a bit of puzzlement. Your comment
        > > helped me to focus in on what has been bothering me, so
        > I'll chime in
        > > here, without any intent of disagreeing with you.
        > >
        > > I often work with customers in terms of a hypothetical UI when I'm
        > > trying to define what the underlying application needs to do.
        > > This might look like UI Design to someone who watched us,
        > since we do
        > > sketch various gui-like interfaces, but I don't think of it
        > that way.
        > > My goal is to figure out what the customer wants to do, not
        > produce a
        > > UI Design.
        > >
        > > Ultimately, there will be a UI, of course, and the work we did in
        > > surfacing the desired interaction with the application will
        > help a lot
        > > in designing that UI, but what we are doing initially is
        > (usually) not
        > > creating a UI - we are creating a visual language for talking about
        > > the application.
        > >
        > > I should add that I don't work this way with /all/ customers. Many
        > > folks are more comfortable with this approach, while others seem to
        > > give me more information when I use different terms. I
        > disagree with
        > > those who say that users can't think in any terms but the user
        > > interface - in fact, it seems like a disrespectful statement.
        > >
        > > The discussion I have been reading seems to have varied between the
        > > two separate (to my mind) activities of talking about the
        > UI as a way
        > > of understanding customer needs and actually designing a
        > UI. I think
        > > that's what was perplexing me.
        > >
        > > Charlie
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
        >
        > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
        > extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
        >
        > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.