Functionalism, aesthetics Was:(RE: I come to praise .join, not

[Clark C. Evans]

> I'm lost for words... This summarizes a lot of concerns that sometimes I 
> find so hard to explain. Anyone who has actually *read* Christopher 
> Alexander's books on design should know that the best solutions are the 
> ones that take into account the inner sense of satisfaction of their end 
> users. As Alexander puts it itself, it is a rewarding experience born out 
> of the "completeness" of the solution. The best solutions also share 
> another common trait: they look *and feel* good to the untrained eye. 
> Beware of works that can only be appreciated by experts - they are way too 
> trained to see the obvious.

CA has a nice talk at OOPSLA a few years back, '97 I believe, where
he really got into these kind of items.  The speech challenged 
programmers to take an ethical/humane approach to software 
construction.  As a programmer I really didn't clue in to what
he was talking with.  Recent work at a local museum has made me
see better, the software they use is deeply disturbing -- the 
antithesis of aestetic concern.  Such a sharp contrast with the
beautyful objects on the table less than a meter away.

Mike C. Fletcher wrote:
> The reason I felt it necessary to jump in here again is the implicit
> creation of a "inner circle" of the "initiated" who are considered
> "worthy" to contribute to a discussion about the evolution of the
> language.

In my experience, Inner circles tend to be self serving and I
avoid them at all costs.  Meritocracy works much better.

> The users of a system, whether it is a building, a language, a piece of
> software, or a chair, need to be heard.  A user complaining that something
> is "ugly", "bad" or "wrong" needs the nature of their discomfort
> ascertained, and that knowledge integrated into further design decisions.

Now, a user community is a horse of a different color.  And, indeed,
I would hope that a strong user community emerges with a voice 
equal to the implementers.  However, this maturity has yet to come
to the software world -- I think it will take many many years.

> Designers who ignore their users, assuming that their own 
> understanding of the system is correct, and that anyone who 
> is unable to speaking the dialect of designers cannot possibly
> contribute to a design, will create monstrosities which are next to
> impossible to inhabit.

Hear Hear!  If only you would broadcast your post on the xml-dev
mailing list... XML Schema is an abomination.

> Its unfortunate that in many cases the non-expert user keeps quiet, 
> assuming that whatever opinion the "master" haves, its going to be better 
> than theirs - after all they are the so-called experts.

Well, this is a problem with open source in general.  Most 
coders have the attitude: "If you can't code, get out of
the kitchen".  Sad, but true.

Clark