Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!ispd-newsserver!nichols From: nichols@ssd.kodak.com (Tim Nichols (37894)) Subject: Re: Art vs. Engineering Message-ID: <1991May9.172546.9261@ssd.kodak.com> Sender: news@ssd.kodak.com Organization: Eastman Kodak References: <35177@athertn.Atherton.COM> <1991May9.124559.2924@ssd.kodak.com> <1991May9.160716.29500@mcs.kent.edu> Distribution: usa Date: Thu, 9 May 91 17:25:46 GMT In article <1991May9.160716.29500@mcs.kent.edu> rothstei@mcs.kent.edu (Michael Rothstein) writes: >In article <1991May9.124559.2924@ssd.kodak.com> nichols@ssd.kodak.com (Tim Nichols (37894)) writes: >>I contend that a better anaology would be the role of a building architect. >>A building architect is aware of the technical aspects of construction, but >>his design effort is focused on how people interact with the building. In a >>similar vein, the software architect should be focused on how people interact >>with the system. Once the architecural design has been completed, the >>technical engineers will apply their processes to insure that the building >>(or software system) won't fall down. > >I had just finished editing my post when I saw this: I also tried to cancel >my post but the software did not let me: at any rate this post answers my >question, though I might add that some emphasis is needed on user interface >design, which, IMHO, is one the most important products the software >architect should develop. >-- >Michael Rothstein (Kent State U)| If cars want to kill themselves, I couldn't agree more. The design emphasis is primarily on user interface from an implemenation perspective. I always emphasize the notion of "human interaction" to my students because as designers we sometimes forget that there are human beings that ultimately have to cope with all those multi-colored widgets on the screen. -- Tim Nichols Eastman Kodak Company nichols@ssd.kodak.com Rochester, New York "Opinions are my own, and do not reflect those of Kodak or its management"