ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667167

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

Design Space Analysis is an approach to representing design rationale. It uses a semiformal notation, called QOC (Questions, Options, and Criteria), to represent the design space around an artifact. The main constituents of QOC are Qustions identifying key design issues, Options providing possible answers to the Questions, and Criteria for assessing and comparing the Options. Design Space Analysis also takes account of justifications for the design (and possible alternative designs) that reflect considerations such as consistency, models and analogies, and relevant data and theory. A Design Space Analysis does not produce a record of the design process but is instead a coproduct of design and has to be constructed alongside the artifact itself. Our work is motivated by the notion that a Design Space Analysis will repay the investment in its creation by supporting both the original process of design and subsequent work on redesign and reuse by (a) providing an explicit representation to aid reasoning about the design and about the consequences of changes to it and (b) serving as a vehicle for communication, for example, among members of the design team or among the original designers and later maintainers of a system. Our work to date emphasises the nature of the QOC representation over processes for creating it, so these claims serve as goals rather than objectives we have achieved. This article describes the elements of Design Space Analysis and illustrates them by reference to analyses of existing designs and to studies of the concepts and arguments used by designers during design discussions.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667168

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

A few representations have been used for capturing design rationale. To understand their scope and adequacy, we need to know how to evaluate them. In this article, we develop a framework for evaluating the expressive adequacy of design rationale representations. This framework is built by progressively differentiating the elements of design rationale that, when made explicit, support an increasing number of the design tasks. Using this framework, we present and assess DRL (Decision Representation Language), a language for representing rationales that we believe is the most expressive of the existing representations. We also use the framework to assess the expressiveness of other design rationale representations and compare them to DRL. We conclude by pointing out the need for articulating other dimensions along which to evaluate design rationale representations.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667169

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

Technology development in human-computer interaction (HCI) can be interpreted as a coevolution of tasks and artifacts. The tasks people actually engage in (successfully or problematically) and those they wish to engage in (or perhaps merely to imagine) define requirements for future technology and, specifically, for new HCI artifacts. These artifacts, in turn, open up new possibilities for human tasks, new ways to do familiar things, and entirely new kinds of things to do. In this article, we describe psychological design rationale as an approach to augmenting HCI technology development and to clarifying the sense in which HCI artifacts embody psychological theory. A psychological design rationale is an enumeration of the psychological claims embodied by an artifact for the situations in which it is used. As an example, we present our design work with the View Matcher, a Smalltalk programming environment for coordinating multiple views of an example application. In particular, we show how psychological design rationale was used to develop a view matcher for code reuse from prior design rationales for related programming tasks and environments.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667170

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

This article presents a case study in the use of problems in design. Problems- concrete examples of user goals whose accomplishment a system is intended to support-were used to describe the intended function of a graphical programming system and to manage the growth of the space of design alternatives for the system. Problems were also used to evaluate alternative designs: They served as bench marks for comparing both the solutions offered by differing designs and the work required of users to reach these solutions. The problem-centered design process includes a representation of design rationale in which the strengths and weaknesses of design alternatives in dealing with specific problems, rather than abstract connections among design issues, are central.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667171

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

We propose an approach to design rationale (DR) that emphasizes supporting the design process in such a way that a trace of the rationale is captured with little disruption of the normal process. We describe a rhetorical method for design dialogue called IBIS (meaning "issue-based information systems") and two implementations of this rhetorical method: a graphical hypertext tool for conducting IBIS discussions called gIBIS and a simple indented text notation. We describe a field trial in an industrial setting in which the "low-tech" indented text IBIS was used to capture more than 2,300 requirements and design decisions. We also explore the implications of this experience for the design of computer tools that, like gIBIS, seek to capture DR nonintrusively.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667172

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

Documenting argumentation (i.e., design rationale) has great potential for serving design. Despite this potential benefit, our analysis of Horst Rittel's and Donald Schon's design theories and of our own experience has shown that there are the following fundamental obstacles to the effective documentation and use of design rationale: (a) A rationale representation scheme must be found that organizes information according to its relevance to the task at hand; (b) computer support is needed to reduce the burden of recording and using rationale; (c) argumentative and constructive design activities must be linked explicitly by integrated design environments; (d) design rationale must be reusable. In this article, we present the evolution of our conceptual frameworks and systems toward integrated design environments; describe a prototype of an integrated design environment, including its underlying architecture; and discuss some current and future work on extending it.

ISSN:0737-0024    

DOI:10.1080/07370024.1991.9667173

出版商:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.    

年代:1991

数据来源: Taylor