SIGIA-L Mail Archives: RE: SIGIA-L: Extreme Programming v. Inte
RE: SIGIA-L: Extreme Programming v. Interaction Design
From: Dave Harland (dave.harland_at_tallan.com)
Date: Fri Jan 18 2002 - 17:51:02 EST
I apologize for not being clear also. My point goes back to the article
and the debate between Beck and Cooper. A core piece of the XP
methodology conflicts with the idea of "architecting" the application
from a user/business perspective before writing one line of code.
Waiting to complete that "phase" (there's that nasty word) accurately
and thoroughly compromises XP.
A core piece of the Interaction Design methodology conflicts with the
idea of iterative and immediate coding (I use the terms loosely, knowing
the intent behind XP). Cooper said, "There's enormous cost in writing
code, but the real cost in writing code is that code never dies. If you
can think this stuff through before you start pouring the concrete of
code, you get significantly better results." Writing code before
accurate and effective user/business analysis is complete compromises
I completely embrace Interaction Design but I can see why XP is popular.
The problem is you can never mix the two effectively without ending up
with mediocrity. I'm opposed too the immediate reaction to the debate
between both camps, which seems to be moderation - "let's do a little of
both so that we appear practical". Doing so brings the industry back to
where it was (and still is) before the advent of either theory.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:54:59 EST