ats:
"In this paper, I suggest that the long-standing focus on 'interaction' may be misguided. For a majority subset of software, called 'information software,' I argue that interactivity is actually a curse for users and a crutch for designers"
I agree with a lot of what he's saying here, although I think some of his redesigned examples are a bit dubious (picking cities off a map, for example).
I like the book examples, though. :)
It's worth noting that this is yet another CSS design that misrenders with large fonts -- the "footnotes" overlap -- but he complains about CSS being poorly-specified in the paper, so I assume he's discovered that already.
David:
I note that he doesn't provide (at least, near the point where he makes the claim) any examples of the "many elementary graphic designs" that can't be implemented with CSS. I wonder if he means "Grid layouts are hard in CSS because they depend on trivial CSS features that IE hasn't implemented."
ats: "In this paper, I suggest that the long-standing focus on 'interaction' may be misguided. For a majority subset of software, called 'information software,' I argue that interactivity is actually a curse for users and a crutch for designers"
I agree with a lot of what he's saying here, although I think some of his redesigned examples are a bit dubious (picking cities off a map, for example).
I like the book examples, though. :)
It's worth noting that this is yet another CSS design that misrenders with large fonts -- the "footnotes" overlap -- but he complains about CSS being poorly-specified in the paper, so I assume he's discovered that already.
David: I note that he doesn't provide (at least, near the point where he makes the claim) any examples of the "many elementary graphic designs" that can't be implemented with CSS. I wonder if he means "Grid layouts are hard in CSS because they depend on trivial CSS features that IE hasn't implemented."