In the past one and a half years, we came across different design guidelines and heuristics. Besides the nineteen use qualities from the Lowgren reading, popped out in my mind are the Seven Themes of Good Design from Professor Marty Siegel and Ten Usability Heuristics by Jacob Nielson. Of course, there are many more.

I would like to know how you construct your “knowledge database”, and when you are store such knowledge, what background information do you take along.

Because for me:

They all look good separately.

But when together…

I do want to manage them well.

And within the nineteen use qualities, I’m particularly interested in parafunctionality.

The term parafunctionality was coined by A. Dunne in his PhD Thesis… Parafunctionality deals with critism since it aims to make you stop, make your senses react to something that only apparentely seems to be useful. A parafunctional object has a clear function that you can understand in a while. But after that, your brain starts to work and tells your stomach that there’s something wrong…

This reminds me about the capstone presentation. A special thought I heard was taking the presentation as a stage to present a problematic design. The purpose was to stimulate critics, and by reacting and articulating, the designer got to know more about his own thought, as well as people’s concern, i.e. what the audience care about. Thus, the designer got to know specific directions to dig.

I think the article itself has the parafunctionality quality. Maybe all papers, more or less have this quality. So readers would have both takeaways and brainstorms in situ.

P.S. Links to some examples from this reading

The Visual Treasure 

Hazed Windows 

Riding the Net