The roads not taken

摘要

DIS provides an intimate semi-annual forum for seriousreflection on the practice of designing interactive systems. Thisis a crucial time to refine our discipline and to figure out wherewe are headed. Two years ago, at the last DIS, we all had jobs, andwere riding high on the new economy. Things are different thisyear.>Twenty years ago, I was lucky to participate in introducing tothe world the Xerox Star, which established the standards for whatwe now call the graphical user interface, the "desktop" or"windows". You could argue that our sponsoring organization, theAssociation for Computing Machinery, Special Interest Group forComputer Human Interaction (ACM SIGCHI) has been focused for thepast twenty years on improving the usability of these graphicalcomputers as they have changed the way we all work andcommunicate.>Now, almost everyone has a "desktop" interface on their desktopor laptop but we are more likely to interact with a computer(including graphical user interfaces!) when we use the phone, checkthe calendar, take a picture or drive a car. Think about all theplaces we are confronted with selecting items from menus, ordealing with modes and arbitrary mappings. What happens whencomputers become "ubiquitous", "pervasive", "tangible" or"invisible"? Is there a new discipline of design, like architectureor industrial design, that spans the human and the technical,dealing with invention as well as implementation?>I like to call this new discipline "interaction design" andclaim that the interaction designer answers three questions:>HOW DO YOU DO?>HOW DO YOU FEEL?>HOW DO YOU KNOW?>We DO with either handles or buttons.>We FEEL either "hot" or "cool" (McLuhan's message).>We KNOW with maps or paths.>Our practice ranges from observation and invention to analysisand implementation. The goal is good mappings for controls anddisplays organized by appropriate modes or mental models fordifferent tasks. We try to create meaning through metaphorsandscenarios while understanding the breakdowns and ideals thatmotivate design.>At DIS2002 we present 14 exhibits, 30 papers and seven invitedsessions. My hope in having organized the invited sessions is thatwe can begin to tie down a definition of interaction design as anew discipline. Tuesday evening, the conference will be kicked-offby Bill Moggridge, an industrial designer who has transformed hispractice over the last 15 years to include what he calls"interaction design". For DIS, he will show some of his "interviewswith interaction designers".>Wednesday there are two panels on education. I consider GillianCrampton Smith, Pelle Ehn and John Maeda the leading educators of"interaction designers". Gillian is now in Italy, directing theInteraction Design Institute Ivrea. Pelle Elm teaches what he calls'the digital bauhaus' at Maim6 in Sweden. John Maeda teaches'aesthetics and computing' at the MIT Media Lab.>Joy Mountford has put together a panel of former and currentstudents who have beeninfluenced by the 'design competitions' shestarted at Apple and continued at Interval Research. All of thesedesigners have become more 'interdisciplinary' by learning to workwith interdisciplinary teams.>Thursday, two panels are planned as an opportunity to reflect oncurrent design practice. Ben Fry, a PhD candidate at the MIT MediaLab, will bring his perspectives as a young interaction designer toexamine the exhibits. Later in the day, Nico Macdonald will bringhis perspectives as a journalist to give us a preview of ourevening tour of London design offices.>Friday we hear from two of the most provocative and thoughtfulinteraction designers. Fiona Raby and Anthony Dunne, researchfellows at the Royal College of Art, explore the relationship ofindustrial design, architecture and electronic media. Finally,Friday afternoon, Tom Moran, one of the pioneers of HCI at Xeroxbut now at IBM, will reflect on the impossibility of 'design'whenthe essence of interaction is 'adaptation'.>We are all engagedin 'everyday design'.>I hope that after DIS2002, you wilt all consider yourselves'interaction designers' and continue to develop a common set ofissues and answers that may serve to tie us together as areflective practice.