| napier on Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:45:02 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| [Nettime-bold] RE: RHIZOME_RAW: GENERATION FLASH: Usability/Interaction |
At 02:05 PM 4/29/2002 -0400, Kanarinka wrote: >Designing for usability is important but designing for interaction is >much more interesting. > >Interaction design answers questions like "Why do users want to do >something with my work? How can users enter into a meaningful, engaging >performative space with this work? A good point. It's valuable to clarify the language, and I agree that interaction is the better term for what we're talking about. I avoid the word sometimes because of the hype that has surrounded it in recent years, yet it is true that some software artwork intends to be interactive, while other work does not. Interaction is effective when it adds meaning to the artwork ie. a participant gains insight into the work, or contributes to the meaning of the work as a result of their interaction. mark napier@potatoland.org _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold