Martin Maney wrote:

>On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 02:43:02PM +0100, Juan David Ibáñez Palomar wrote:
>
>
>>In general, I agree with him, in particular with the sentence
>>"Designers still need to wade through code".
>>
>>
>
>I think that this is the root of a big misunderstanding.  Web pages are
>made up of at least *three* components, and one of them are entirely
>separable from the others.  I'm also dubious of the implication that
>designers of web pages can avoid wading through code, because web pages
>seem to me to require at least three major design components, and they
>have in general quite a lot of overlap:
>
>There's the graphic design.
>
>There's what we might call the "business logic".
>
>And there is, or ought to be, the UI design.  This one usually gets
>shortchanged even when it is actually considered by anyone - at least
>that's what my own experience of the state of what's out there seems to
>suggest.  Another possibility might be that UI design gets shorted
>because everyone is building tools and infrastructures that divide
>web design in two, when it, like Gaul, is actually trifurcated.
>
>If you ignore UI design, you can delude yourself into imagining that
>web design can be split into two mostly independent parts.  Of course
>it never really divides entirely cleanly, but sometimes it works well
>enough to make people think that if only they could find the *right*
>templating language/design language/etc. they could achieve some sort
>of perfect separation.
>
>Oh, andOfCourse they would have a fine shot at making some real money,
>or they would if the e-conomy ever gets its wheels firmly under it.
>
>Obviously, I think these efforts are a little bit misguided.  The
>really hard part of web design is resolving the inevitable conflicts
>between the artistes, the needs of good UI design, and the logic
>design.  If you don't try to pretend that UI either "just happens" or
>can be thrown over the fence to the other guy, it's blindingly obvious
>that things are all intermingled.  Sure, some bits can be sorted out,
>and that's even useful - but that's at the implementation level, and
>that's not the hard part of making web pages.
>
>Then again, good design doesn't seem to be much desired, judging from
>the majority of the sites I see.
>
>Anyway, much of what I like about Quixote is that it doesn't waste its
>effort, or clutter its design, with attempts to square the circle.  I
>may be deluded, but I know what I like.  :-)
>
>
>

There isn't a tool for everybody and for everything. The tool
to use depends of what you want to do and which the skills of
your team are. Unfortunately sometimes it also depends on other
constrains (what the boss wants to use for example).

I don't pretend to achieve perfection, I just pretend to improve
my productivity and the productivity of the people I work with.

You identify three factors, graphic design, UI and business logic.
It isn't posible to completely separate them, but it is posible to
reduce the overlapping.

Another important thing is that, within the overlap, the different
members of the team speak the same language. For example, I like to
work with graphic designers that have a minimum knowledge of HTML,
CSS2 and usability; even if I do the UI, it helps in the communication.
However asking a graphic designer to learn Python is too much (usually,
it depends on the graphic designer).

Of the three factors UI is the most important for me, at least is the
one I spend more time on.

Again, I don't pretend to say that XPY is for you. Please don't try
to sell me PTL, I like it because of its originality, but it don't
satisfies my requirements.


Regards,

--
J. David Ibáñez, http://www.j-david.net
Software Engineer / Ingénieur Logiciel / Ingeniero de Software