Crafting interaction: The epistemology of modern programming

There is a long tradition in design of discussing materials and the craft of making artefacts. “Smart” and interactive materials affected what constitutes a material. Interaction design is a design activity that creates the appearance and behaviour of information technology, challenged by the illusiveness of interactive materials. With the increased design space of ubiquitous devices, designers can no longer rely on a design process based on known interaction idioms, especially for innovative highly interactive designs. This impedes the design process, because non-interactive materials, by which designers create sketches, storyboards, and mock-up prototypes, do not provide the essential talkbacks needed to make reliable assessments of the design characteristics. Without a well-defined design, the engineering process of artefacts has unclear ends, which are not encompassed in the rational epistemology of engineering. To value the experiential qualities of these artefacts, the prototypes need to be interactive and crafted in code. This paper investigates the materiality of information technology, specifically programming language code from which interactive artefacts are made. A study of users of programming languages investigates how they describe programming language code as a material. If you have a material, it is reasonable, because of the tradition in the material and craft fields, to say you have a craft. Thus, considering code a design material allows the metaphor of craft to be used for the activity of programming.

[1]  Tracee Vetting Wolf,et al.  Dispelling "design" as the black art of CHI , 2006, CHI.

[2]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  What do Sketches Say about Thinking , 2002 .

[3]  Henrik Kniberg,et al.  Kanban and Scrum - Making the Most of Both , 2010 .

[4]  Jayne Wallace,et al.  All this Useless Beauty: the Case for Craft Practice in Design for a Digital Age , 2004 .

[5]  Mitchell Kapor.  A software design manifesto , 1990 .

[6]  Daniel Fallman,et al.  The Interaction Design Research Triangle of Design Practice, Design Studies, and Design Exploration , 2008, Design Issues.

[7]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  From Technical Rationality to reflection-in-action , 2001 .

[8]  Johan Redström.  On Technology as Material in Design , 2005 .

[9]  Thomas Memmel,et al.  Agile human-centered software engineering , 2007, BCS HCI.

[10]  Jeff Sutherland.  Business object design and implementation workshop , 1995, OOPSLA '95.

[11]  Tomas Sokoler,et al.  A Material Strategy : Exploring Material Properties of Computers , 2010 .

[12]  B Boehm.  A spiral model of software development and enhancement , 1986, SOEN.

[13]  P. Dourish,et al.  Media as Material: Information Representations as Material Foundations for Organizational Practice , 2011 .

[14]  Donald A. Sch.  The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action , 1983 .

[15]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Towards a more cherishable digital object , 2012, DIS '12.

[16]  Daniela Karin Rosner,et al.  Reflections on craft: probing the creative process of everyday knitters , 2009, C&C '09.

[17]  Mikael Wiberg,et al.  From materials to materiality: thinking of computation from within an Icehotel , 2011, INTR.

[18]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[19]  Jonas Löwgren.  Interaction design, research practices and design research on the digital materials , 2015 .

[20]  Orit Hazzan,et al.  The Agile Manifesto , 2014 .

[21]  Malcolm McCullough,et al.  Abstracting Craft: The Practiced Digital Hand , 1996 .

[22]  Jan Gulliksen,et al.  The Big Picture of UX is Missing in Scrum Projects , 2012, I-UxSED.

[23]  Glenn Adamson.  The Craft Reader , 2009 .

[24]  Ingrid Hylander,et al.  Grundad teori : ett teorigenererande forskningsperspektiv , 2005 .

[25]  Johan Redström,et al.  Becoming materials: material forms and forms of practice , 2010, Digit. Creativity.

[26]  Bill Moggridge,et al.  Designing interactions , 2006 .

[27]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[28]  Elise van den Hoven,et al.  Hybrid crafting: towards an integrated practice of crafting with physical and digital components , 2014, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[29]  Peter Seibel.  Coders at Work: Reflections on the Craft of Programming , 2009 .

[30]  Bill Buxton,et al.  Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design , 2007 .

[31]  H. D. Benington,et al.  Production of Large Computer Programs , 1983, Annals of the History of Computing.

[32]  Robert C. Martin.  Clean Code - a Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship , 2008 .

[33]  B. Glaser.  The Future of Grounded Theory , 1999 .

[34]  Olav W. Bertelsen,et al.  Instrumentness for creativity mediation, materiality & metonymy , 2007, C&C '07.

[35]  Joruts LBwgret.  Applying Design Methodology to Software Development , 1999 .

[36]  Thomas Memmel,et al.  Agile human-centered software engineering , 2007 .

[37]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  The Nature of Design Practice and Implications for Interaction Design Research , 2008 .

[38]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  The Rational Unified Process Made Easy - A Practitioner's Guide to the RUP , 2003, Addison Wesley object technology series.

[39]  W BoehmBarry.  A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement , 1988 .

[40]  Rikard Lindell.  “Jag älskar att allt ligger överst” : En designstudie av ytinteraktion för kollaborativa multimedia-framträdanden , 2009 .

[41]  Richard Edwards,et al.  From technical rationality to reflection-in-action , 2013 .

[42]  Ken Schwaber,et al.  SCRUM Development Process , 1997 .

[43]  Barry Boehm,et al.  A view of 20th and 21st century software engineering , 2006, ICSE.

[44]  R. J. Bogumil,et al.  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , 1985, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[45]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Empirical Findings in Agile Methods , 2002, XP/Agile Universe.