[IxDA Discuss] True or False: In a perfect world we'd all create html clickable wireframes after the static ones have been done

[Elizabeth Bacon]

TRUE! I am dying for more IxD prototyping! The paper wireframe/mockup  
can only go so far when it comes to communicating digital systems to  
large groups of developers & business stakeholders. Especially if you  
have any questions of performance, evaluating the impact of time on  
the interaction...nothing but an active system will do. And usability  
testing really necessitates an interactive prototype when there are  
tough questions of workflow involved. Although visual responses and  
impressions are valid research on the mockup/wireframe level, what  
people say and what people do just don't necessarily align.

I'm excited by some technologies like Ruby, a dynamic programming  
language may make code comprehensible to the non-programmer. I never  
ever wanted to write code, but I am working on being more capable  
when it comes to prototyping. Thankfully I have a partner who's an  
engineer! We are looking at the possibilities of going from Fireworks  
-> Flex, in the future. Clickable HTML wireframes can be pretty  
sweet, though, just by themselves.

Although, in direct answer to the stated question, I think it's kind  
of perfect if I personally could stick to the IxD, and somebody else  
could build the prototype. :) But bring on the tangible interaction!

Cheers,
Liz


> On Aug 31, 2007, at 2:59 PM, Dan Saffer wrote:
>
>> Really? In the world I live in, where I don't always get to hook up
>> prototypes to live databases and where I have neither the time nor
>> resources to build prototypes that replicate every use case I can
>> think of, wireframes are still important.
>
> On Aug 31, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

> That sounds more like a problem of technology as it stands today, and
> should not be used to dismiss the need to create prototypes. I deal
> with the same thing. I have to often get creative and it's a pain,
> but that's just the way it is. But it's simply a hurdle, not a reason
> to negate the purpose and outright necessity to build a functioning
> prototype in some form or fashion.
>>