Give me your definition then

[LazyJim]

I have recently posted about the few Web sites I have made.

I then went on another thread and said I didn't design them.

What's the problem?
I made the sites, they are all my own work, but did not design them.

I guess that some people think that when I said I didn't design those sites, they thought I was talking about the opposite of saying these were sites I have made.
I think this highlights the difference in how I think of the word design, and how some other people do.

This has caused some trouble, but some good debate and discussion also. So I don't want to drop the subject completely just yet.


So now instead of telling you that I don't think you and I have the same understanding of the D word, I'll ask you to give your definitions.

[1] How do you define the word "Design"?
[2] What do you think designers should do?
(If you consider yourself a designer I am not asking what you do, just what designers in general do.)

Please also note that currently I'm not talking about the Web at all.

[Brian]

To design is to formulate a plan, and designers create so in a highly skilled manner.

[Rick]

Edit--- oops, I didn't know you were not talking about the web. Oh well.

Web design refers to all things visual about a site, including its layout, colors, graphics, fonts, etc.

Web development refers to the markup translation of that design (i.e. the actual code).

[AcRoNym]

well look on http://www.ciwcertified.com they have different categories for designer,developer etc. generally a developer is a programmer well more off get certified then youll have a title

[Suspicious]

I'm going to go as far to saying it's like religion. You define it however you want. Everybody's view and definition is different.

As for me, the designer is the one who thinks up of the concept of the site. The reds go here, and the blues go there, and the content goes here. A developer makes it happen.

I found a book on Web Usability a Borders that illustrated this though, which throws a monkey wrench into my definition, but I like how it works. A web design team consists of the CEO (the client), the developer, the designer, and the business person (I only browsed quickly through it). The CEO basically gets what he wants in the end, because he's paying for it. The developer is trying to get the site to WORK properly. The designer is trying to make is visually appealing and balanced to attract as many customers as possible, and the business person apparently makes sure everything's alright with the sponsors and copyrights and whatnot. The main players, of course, are the developer and designer, and they just compare their work with the other two to see if it checks out.

I know this is way beyond my league (I make websites for personal reasons, not business), but hey, it's all a learning experience.

I think the book was something like "Don't Make Me Think - A Web Usability Guide". I'll look for it on Amazon.

*later* thair it is

[gecko]

well the thing about religion is if you dont follow the basics of that religion you can still "CALL" yourself that religion but you arent really

[Suspicious]

Originally Posted by gecko

well the thing about religion is if you dont follow the basics of that religion you can still "CALL" yourself that religion but you arent really

And some people who use Geocities Pagebuilder call themselves "web designers" but they aren't really. Besides, I was only using the comparision for the aspect that people define their own views religion and what it values to them, just as people define their definition of "web designer" and whatever aspect they believe that term fulfills.

[gecko]

suspicious thats what i was saying

calling yourself a jew doesn tmake u anymore of a jew than a being a geocities ranger makes you a web designer

[Rick]

Originally Posted by gecko

calling yourself a jew doesn tmake u anymore of a jew than a being a geocities ranger makes you a web designer

Geocities ranger? LOL

[AcRoNym]

thats what cerification is for

[gecko]

u cant throw ranger after anything

frontpage ranger
geocities ranger
grammer ranger

it all sounds funny if you say it out loud

[Rick]

Reminds me of Ranger Rick, whom I was teased about when I was growing up. :wink:

[gecko]

ranger rick? was that like a local nut? cause we had bicycle bob

[Rick]

Originally Posted by gecko

ranger rick? was that like a local nut? cause we had bicycle bob

LOL, not local, but definitely a nut:

Linky

[gecko]

oh weird, sounds familiar

[LazyJim]

I was starting to realise the difference in all our concepts of Design.
Suspicious's analogy with religion says a lot about it.

[LazyJim]

Here's my definition then.

Verb1 - To create or contrive for a particular purpose or effect.
Verb2 - To draw a decortive pattern.
Noun1 - A plan; a project.
Noun2 - An ornamental pattern.
Noun3 - A graphic representation, especially a detailed plan for construction or manufacture.

I can see how someone without my background can easily concider making something that they think about before, during, and after making, to be designing. And in essence, they're right - I'm beginning to see it from this point of view at last.

I can also see how the noun can make some people think it's only about visuals, graphics, and art.

I have spent years studying many types of design, none of them were the art kind that simply involved creating pretty patterns.

All the types of design I have studied emphasised that it all starts with a problem, and a solution is found by the end of one cycle, (it doesn't stop there, the cycle repeats if the problem remains).
There is a recognised process common to all the sorts of design I have studied, and although it always varies slightly from context to context and from person to person, there is always a core set stages to go through in order to complete the design process thoroughly.

The first step to make a carful analysis of the problem and research existing solutions to the same and similar problems, as well as a very carful consideration of who is going to use the solution.
You have to define the goals, the requirements, the limitations, and the scope. This is know as the specification.
You should also evaluate existing solutions so you can avoid their mistakes and apply their strengths to your design.
Then you come up with many concept ideas for solving the problem, evaluate each of your own ideas against the specification you made and chose the most apt one to develop.
when developing a concept design further, constant re-evaluation helps the concept design improve into a good final design.
The design will usually incorporate the materials and manufacturing processes to be used, and may need some trials to see if it can be built that way, and if parts of it work as expected.
Next you have to carry your design out, manifest it, build it.
Then you test it to see if the manufacturing process worked and the product ended up how you designed it.
Then you test it against the specifications to see if it meets your requirements.
Finally you evaluate how well the solution you created solves the problem you started with, where it met the specifications, and how well you specifications suited the problem.
Then it all starts back round at the beginning unless the design was perfect and no circumstances have changed.

This is a very thou rough approach that I think can be applied to absolutely anything should you feel the need.

But the more you practice the easier and faster it becomes. You start to do a lot of it in your head.

A great advantage of the stages that come before the actual ideas stage. Is that you pile all the facts and specification and inspiration into your head and then you brain starts work on it without you even thinking. Then you have to tap into that subconscious brain work and make them into tangible concepts.

I think the only way to evaluate your product is to have a well thought out specification to check it against. You can show then that you have successfully designed a good and fitting solution to the original problem. <--- That's important to get your money off the client.

The success of the product is a different matter I think, unless it was somehow included in the requirements.

Maybe I attached to the before and after stages to thedesign stage mistakedly, but I don't see how you can design without the before stages being complete.

Anyway, I'm not saying everyone who calls themself a designer should do it my way.
I was mainly concerneed with the fact that a lot of the time, only the after-design stages are carried out, but are sold as complete designs. Thinking that a 'designer' creates 'complete designs' the way I outlined above was probably naive of me. I was definatly not implying that the regulars here were 'culprits' either.

[DaveyBoy]

whats this? another lazyjim topic discussing what web design actually is! Well, i'll be damned!

[Gede]

Jim, do you happen to know Ferre, well?

[LazyJim]

DaveyBoy if you did read my words you'de realise that's not what I'm doing.

Gede: Ferre?