[IxDA Discuss] What do you call this?

[Jonathan Abbett]

I think there's a place for both -- one has high interactive fidelity
and the other has high visual fidelity.  I'm toying with the name
"clickframes" as an alternative, so the business folks I meet with
don't end up with the wrong expectations.

As for keeping copies along the way, I use enterprise wiki software to
build my "clickframes" so all changes are tracked automatically.
(Granted, they're page-by-page histories, so you can't easily revert
the entire site to a particular point in time...)

-Jonathan


On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Katie Albers <katie at firstthought.com> wrote:
> Well, I don't know if it's useful or not, but what you're showing is what I
> was taught a wireframe is...and it's extremely useful because as the specs
> become more specific they can be added in to the wireframe and you can very
> closely approximate the current status of the application/site/product
> (always being sure to keep a pure copy of each stage along the way so you
> can back yourselves out if necessary). In fact, I've never really understood
> why the "visio/omnigraffle/whatever Visually oriented but not functioning
> wireframe is supposed to be better.
>
> Katie
>
> At 10:27 AM -0400 5/27/08, Jonathan Abbett wrote:
>>
>> I do this--
>>
>> http://www.grokdotcom.com/wireframing.htm
>>
>> --and it's been very useful.
>>
>> The author calls it "wireframing," but everyone else in the world says
>> that
>> a wireframe is a low-fidelity mockup.
>>
>> Do other names exist for this sort of clickable, text-only, HTML
>> pre-prototype?
>>
>> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
> --
>
> ------------------
> Katie Albers
> User Experience Strategy & Project Management
> katie at firstthought.com
>