Recently, I have received letters from some children's shoes, often asking questions focused on: How to become an interactive designer? What software should you learn?
I sometimes do not know how to start the answer, around the heart that the interaction designer is a comprehensive ability to require a lot of occupations, can not "shuoyibuer." Tool is very important, now many large enterprises design departments are in the development of design standards, normative software tools to master more and more attention. However, I think that designers should be less "polished", think more "why", "How to Do", that is, from the "operation" gradually into the "road" level. It seems too mysterious to say so.
This time I have been thinking about a problem--design, especially whether interaction design can be summed up as a thought process.
One way of thinking: from "plane" to "stage" design
An interactive design predecessors said that the limitations of design thinking are sometimes too rigidly adhere to the front of the "box", if you turn the two-dimensional square interface in front of you into a thought, flip it over, see a stage, the elements you need are your actors, when to transition, when that role will appear ... A lot of things will be enlightened.
In fact, this way of thinking, the normal face of the two-dimensional interface better fit user contact three-dimensional, four-dimensional space, to achieve simulation of the reality, increase user awareness and understanding of the operation.
Perhaps just say this, may not hold. For example, in practical work, we might discuss with the team whether or not the page should have a function, where it appears, and how this feature element appears. It may be argued that no one has any particular reason to serve the public. In fact this is the time to use this way of thinking, this functional element as an actor, if you are a director, then the actor should be:
When to show up: When do users need it?
Actors at the right time to the right place, where it will not affect the protagonist's style, but also eye-catching enough: it will affect the appearance of my main function? Does it appear that the user can perceive it?
Its appearance is to gradually show or suddenly appear: transition, jump, surfaced or pop-up appropriate?
Two ways of thinking: Interaction design is about "time"
This way of thinking also helps us think about "when", which is a very important "timeline" design in interactive design. Design has time, and perhaps many designers, including myself, often overlook this. The user is the object that moves from the beginning to the last time, and over time, the interaction media and the interactive scene will change. Even if the same element, different time states show the way should be different. For a simple example of this, you will understand immediately.
App Store for the installation of the software, you will find that when you first installed, the status of the display is "free", that is to show the user what is the nature of the app. When a new update is installed, the update is displayed, indicating that the current app is updated and can be clicked. When the user has installed the latest version, it displays the "Installed" gray, telling the user that you have installed, no more operation. Ash is a good way to prevent users from misoperation, this in the "fault-tolerant design" described here is not much to say.
Three ways of thinking: the process of "operation"
The word "operation" here includes not only the initial need to master the rapid prototyping (fast performance on paper), but also the familiarity of common interactive patterns in the early stages of interaction design.
If you agree: design is to solve the problem. Interaction design often provides solutions to problems. Well, being familiar with the existing UI patterns is very useful for you to solve common problems.
For example, the parallel panel mode (accordion mode) can be closed (one at a time), or it can be expanded (all at once). This pattern is suitable for organizing a large number of similar or interactive information, allowing users to obtain information more efficiently on the same page. Best application: Require applicants to fill in a variety of no order categories.
More about design patterns can be referenced in the common UI design patterns. In addition to these usually need to look at different product interface, the more contact with the ability to hand more.
Four ways of thinking: innovation
I remember that when I was in grad school, a tutor who made the art of installation said, "The innovation of design is to enlarge the things that should be big and what should be small." "Now think about it, it can spread out, break some of the usual combinations, and regroup some elements." Getting rid of the routine is an innovation.
For example, a button previously seen, put the loading state and ungroup together, which is different from our common strip progress bar, the right to cancel the button mode. This combination of different elements is an innovation.
These are some of my previous understandings, not daring to say absolutely right, or even a collection of several different thinking processes.
I thank my Uncle Puma for the inspiration of my interactive design thinking.
Article Source: Zhang Yatiu Blog