Looking toward the end of the Moggridge, I thought it would be worthwhile to start with some thoughts about the levels of complexity involved in design projects. While it is neither necessary nor possible to recount every detail here, I became interested in the movement between levels of complexity and abstraction as one considers the various factors from the anthropometric and the ecological. While Moggridge discusses these in a fairly linear fashion, given the arguments put forth in rest of the selection I wonder if it might align more closely with that spirit if one were to approach these in the reverse order (if addressing them in order is even a necessity to begin with). It seems like the focus on tacit knowledge and process-based learning might lend itself well to beginning in the abstract, though on the other hand an intimate knowledge of the tools and materials involved (in a broad sense) is perhaps the best resource for understanding and negotiating the constraints that will ultimately shape a project.
These questions of order of operations turn us to MacCormick in an interesting way, as the steps for fabricating a physical prototype often have considerably less room for flexibility in this regard, especially when compared to (seemingly) computing. Not having experience in any of the computer sciences, however, I do wonder if any of these systems have similar constraints. While it seems to make sense that certain types of operations are more efficiently handled in fixed sequences, is there a rule dictating that the various tasks used in page ranking be handled in the order that they are presented, or any other? In other words, is there an advantage in terms of time or resources for a search engine to move from hyperlink to authority to random surfer tricks in that order, or is there any inherent barrier to parallel processing for these types of operations?
In thinking of orders and sequences, I tend to move sooner or later to the issue of narrative, which is given interesting, though quite distinct, expression in both the Literat / Balsamo and Ghose / Ipeirotis / Li pieces. I was particularly interested in the potential for exploring the AIDS Quilt in such a way, based on the visualization tools introduced in the piece. The addition of annotations, the possibility of exclusively digital panels and the context provided the timeline are all quite interesting as responses that encourage users to engage with the Quilt as an object with many histories, of which they are soon to become a part. What stands out to me the most, however, is the connection to Moggridge, as users of every system outlined in the piece are prompted to shift between scales, times, stories and types of visibility, encouraging a varied and personal approach to narrativization that incorporates what already exists in and around the Quilt. Exploring a somewhat opposite, and considerably lamer approach, Ghose, Ipeirotis and Li consider how travel booking websites and customers exhibit varying degrees of control over the search process. What is perhaps most relevant here is the observation that greater freedom in terms of customization (from the perspective of the user) had opposite effects based on the degree to which the user had already planned for the purchase. While unsurprising, it was nevertheless an interesting example of the inversely proportional relationship between the narrative of the website and the customer, and the struggle that is enacted over the user's time and money.