You are currently browsing qianhuang’s articles.

I was a little confused about how to use sequence analysis in analysis interface and just get clearer after Jeff’s comments about it. I am just trying to put my understanding here. Let me know if I get it wrong.

That is, go through certain pre-determined path. When doing sequence analysis, we only take care of what is on the stage and of our interests at that time (may we call it mise en scene of the interface in use?). It seems in this way, we can find equivalents for what is talked by Powrie in the chapter of “sequence analysis”, including description of shot, “camera”, dialogue, “text of the interface”. By “camera”, in interface design we could mean the way how we bring the “hotspot” content to screen and how we place the it into the window space, such as pop-up window, full page refresh/ part refresh, focus erea zoom in, etc.


I recently came cross many online shopping website. Though they are all trying to sell their stock, surprisingly, they are so different in those signs that distinguish them from others, in their entry gate, inner design and way of selling. One website that most interested me is, which claim itself as a private shopping destination and invited-only, you “need” to know someone who was in to get in. (as the picture below) This is not really the case. There are various of way to get the “invitation”, you don’t really need to “know” someone to get in. However, they are working hard on signs to make you feel like to have a peek and make you to believe there are something “delicious” inside.

This website has several different looking entry gate. Let’s us the following picture, part of one entry gate, shows after you click “peek”, as the first example. On one hand, looking at the elegant lady and her joyful face, it is telling you, “ok, you got the peek, this is what we are doing inside – a bunch of elegant ladies are enjoying their feast of fashion here. Join us?” On the other hand, it is telling you that “we are so sorry that we cannot let you in now. We are high-class club and we need to be sure you are a member of our group to let you in.”


Some other entries are showed as bellow:




All their entries are trying to get you in to tell you the two hand story. It stimulate your desire to peak into the hole, get you own key and your desire to be in the “high-class” community and be as elegant as ladies and men in the picture. They won’t let you in emmidiately, however, they know you will find a way to get in. The entry gates already got their jobs done. It’s the era of internation, a google search or forum post will get things set.

I was reading the “some aspect of sign” by Thwaites, Davis, & Mules. The “functions of address” it talked about provided a clear way to understand the “interaction” between sender and receiver, which equivalent to designer and user in design.

It was always a pain to think about the relationship and “interaction” between designer and users and their interpretation of each other, because they don’t directly communicate with each other but by the media of product. It could become frustrating when you trying to understand the “communication” between them two by themselves psychologically. However, using the methods in this article, we avoid this pain by two separations – “the separation of addresser from sender and addressee from receiver is what lets us do semiotics rather than psychology”. The understanding of interaction between sender and receiver then became the one of addresser and addressee, the understanding of “sign’s function of address”.

I am reading a book about color. There is a section about what color suggested ” youth”. It point out that it is almost impossible to say which color or combination means youth, as we can do for categories as feminine. However, there is still patterns of youth, which is “extremes”. It is said that youth “reject a safe middle ground in favor of extremes: colors that are either extremely bright or extremely pale; sharp contrasts, or almost no contrast at all.” When read to this point, I instantly matched these information with what we saw in the cards that Jeff hand out in the class of last week. I can now verbalize why these picture give us a feeling of youth, powerful and non-mainstream, as least from the perspective of color, which I was not able to do, though I got the visual impact at that time.

This makes me feel that in preparing for criticism, it is not enough for just learning methods of criticism. What we also need is the background knowledge of the areas that we are about to criticize. As for visual criticism, can we do it well without knowledge the theories about color and the history of modem visual design?

In last class we talked about the base for us to understand each other – intersubjectivity. By its usage, from weak to broad sense, intersubjectivity could mean from a simple agreement to common sense, and to “partially agreed divergences of meaning”. (three usage is from Wikipedia. I know it is lazzy to reference wiki, but didn’t find a better resourse).

During a deisgn process, designers are always trying to understand their end-users. During the use of a product, end-users are also interpreting designers’ design decisions (consciously or not). The intersubjectivity of designer and end-user is important and interesting to think about.

So, I am thinking as designers, which meaning of the three is of more importance for us? or if different stage we should focus on different level of intersubjectivity, which one in which stage? Another question is, how can we distinguish and make this different focus?

When think through those design projects I have been in, common-sense is the one we tried to get and to use from start to end. However, in HCI design, a design that highly related to new technology, common-sense may not always be available. When there is not an available common-sense to base on for one design decision, we need to make a desicion that hopefully will become an “agreement” later on (when they have the products). (Though in some design situation, such as participatory design, we can actually make an agreement during the design process, but not always. ) Do we have a way to evaluate this decision, how likely it would be an agreement,  before user testing? For “partially agreed divergences of meaning”, how to use it in design? Do we use it consciously? It seems we could use it in design experience, but functionally, can we use it? I need some more thought, or maybe need more time to understand what is “partially agreed divergences of meaning”.

Any thoughts?