「メモ/デザイン」の編集履歴（バックアップ）一覧はこちら
「メモ/デザイン」(2020/05/06 (水) 03:27:27) の最新版変更点
追加された行は緑色になります。
削除された行は赤色になります。
#contents
>「火薬の最たる効果は身を焼く炎でも切り裂く破片でもない！！ 音と光 衝撃と畏怖 恐慌（おそれ）！！」
ドリフターズ 3巻
-[[Science for Designers: The Meaning of Complexity>http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20120330/science-for-designers-the-meaning-of-complexity]]
-[[Science for Designers: The Transformation of Wholes>http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20120413/science-for-designers-the-transformation-of-wholes]]
>依頼された仕事や演奏家の才能による制約が十分にないとき、バッハは自身の創造性を刺激するために、完全に人工的な制約を導入することがあった。
-[[デザインのためのデザイン]], p.131
-[[Commonalities across designing: Evidence from models of designing and experiments>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], 2012
-[[The Nature of Design Thinking>http://www.dab.uts.edu.au/research/conferences/dtrs8/docs/DTRS8-Dorst.pdf]], 2010,
-[[Representational affordances in design, with examples from analogy making and optimization>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2011.html]], 2011
-[[Design research: a revolution-waiting-to-happen>http://faculty.washington.edu/ajko/teaching/insc541/reading/Dorst2008.pdf]]
-[[Design>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2011.html]], Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2011
> ですから本書では誤解を招く言い方ですが、まず、キャラクターとは「デザインするもの」ではなく「つくるもの」だ、と定義することから始めます。「キャラクター」を「デザイン」することは「キャラクター」を「つくる」ことの一部分を成しますが、その全てではありません。「デザインする」、つまり視覚的なレベルのみで他のキャラクターと違った新しい何かを産み出そうと工夫していても、キャラクターは「つくれない」とぼくは考えます。キャラクターの視覚的なデザインというのは、キャラクターを他人と共有するためアウトプットする工程であって、「つくること」それ自体ではありえません。
[[キャラクターメーカー]], p.17
> 環境意識の高まりや、消費者が企業にモノではなく経験を求めるようになったことがネットワークの時代とマッチして、デザイン業界のリーダーたちが言うように、デザインは「創造」から「思考」へと大きく飛躍した。デザイン的思考とは、人為的な創造のプロセスを、システムや経験を使うことで、一つひとつ別々の製品についてではなく、もっと大きな問題の解決に応用するという意味だ。
[[シェア]], p.235
> [...] こうした製品を生みだす彼の手法と考え方は、カリムのホームページで「カリマニフェスト」として紹介されている。「今、デザインは問題解決の手段ではない……すべての産業が、美を気にかけるべきだ──つまるところ、それが人間の集合的なニーズなのだから」
[[シェア]], pp.232-233
*定義・特徴
>[…] Jones (1970) has commented that ‘changing the problem in order to find a solution is the most challenging and difficult part of designing’. He also points out that ‘designing should not be confused with art, with science, or mathematics.’
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.24
>To base design theory on inappropriate paradigms of logic and science is to make a bad mistake. Logic has interests in abstract forms. Science investigates extant forms. Design initiates novel forms. March, 1976
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.24
>It has been suggested that this feature of design behaviour arises from the nature of design problems: they are not the sort of problems or puzzles that provide all the necessary and sufficient information for their solution. Some of the relevant information can only be found by generating and testing solutions; some information, or ‘missing ingredient’, has to be provided by the designer himself, as noted by Levin(1966) from his observations of urban designers. […]
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.36
>It is widely accepted that design 'problems' can only be regarded as a version of ill-defined problems. In a design project it is often not at all clear what ‘the problem’ is; it may have been only loosely defined by the client, many constraints and criteria may be un-defined, and everyone involved in the project may know that goals may be re-defined during the project. In design, ‘problem’ are often defined only in relation to ideas for their ‘solution’, and designers do not typically proceed by first attempting to define their problems rigorously.
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], pp.99--100
>[…] The difference was observed by Lawson (1979), in his experiments on problem-solving behaviour in which he compared scientists with architects. Designers are solution-focused, unlike problem-focused scientists.
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.101
>One of the dangers in this new field of design research is that researchers from other, non-design, disciplines will import methods and approaches that are inappropriate to developing the understanding of design. Researchers from psychology or computer science, for example, have tended to assume that there is ‘nothing special’ about design as an activity for investigation, that it is just another form of ‘problem solving’ or ‘information processing’. However, developments in artificial intelligence and other computer modelling in design have perhaps served mainly to demonstrate just how high-level and complex is the cognitive ability of designers, and how much more research is needed to understand it. […]
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], pp.126--127
**プロダクト
Designs are the instructions, based on knowledge, that turn
resources into things people use and value.
Carliss Y. Baldwin, [[Design Theory and Methods>http://www.people.hbs.edu/cbaldwin/]]
**プロセス
It is based on the idea that every design problem begins
with an effort to achieve fitness between two entities: the
form in question and its context. The form is the solution
to the problem; the context defines the problem. In other
words, when we speak of design, the real object of discussion
is not the form alone, but the ensemble comprising the form
and its context. Good fit is a property of this ensemble
which relates to some particular division of the ensemble
into form and context.
[[Notes on the Synthesis of Form]], pp. 15-16
Thus, design is purposeful and the activity of designing is
goal-oriented. The meta-goal of design is to transform
requirements, more generally termed functions which embody
the expectations of the purposes of the resulting artefact,
into design descriptions.
The result of the activity of designing is a design description.
This design description generally is represented graphically,
numerically, and/or textually. The purpose of such a description
is to transfer sufficient information about the designed
artefact so that it can be manufactured, fabricated or constructed.
[[Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/1990.html]]
>Designing is a process that aims to create the structure (S) of artefacts that meet a set of requirements stated as functions (F) and possible behaviours (B)
[[Creative designing: An ontological view>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]]
>[...] Design is the process of inventing objects -- our "things" -- that perform specific functions. [...]
[[Design Rules>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Design-Rules-Modularity-Carliss-Baldwin/dp/0262024667/]], p. 2
>This is compatible with a widely held view among designers that design is an attempt at global optimization with finite resources.
[[Sketches of Thought>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Sketches-Thought-Bradford-Books-Vinod/dp/0262071630/]], p. 256
>Design, at some very abstract level, is the process of transforming one set of representations (the design brief) into another set of representations (the contract documents).
[[Sketches of Thought>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Sketches-Thought-Bradford-Books-Vinod/dp/0262071630/]], p. 128
[...] In the balance of this section I will review studies
where the experimental design involve the manipulation
between heuristic and formal strategies.[...]
[[Cognitive Neuroscience of Thinking>http://www.yorku.ca/vgoel/pub.frame.html]]
Designing is an activity during which designers perform
actions in order to change their environment.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
[...] Schön and Wiggins (1992) found that designers use
their sketches not only as an external memory, but also as
a means to reinterpret what they have drawn, thus leading
the design in a new direction.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
Situated designing, whether carried out by humans or a
design system, uses first-person knowledge grounded in the
designer’s interactions with their environment (Bickhard
and Campbell 1996; Clancey 1997; Ziemke 1999; Smith and
Gero 2005). This is in contrast to static approaches that
attempt to encode all relevant design knowledge prior to
its use. Evidence in support of first-person knowledge is
provided by the fact that different designers are likely
to produce different designs for the same set of requirements.
And the same designer is likely to produce different designs
at different points in time even though the same requirements
are presented. This is a result of the designer acquiring
new knowledge while interacting with their environment.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
*よいデザイン
>彼はデザインの最終目的は形であり、デザインの問題は、形をコンテクストに適合させることだとしている。形とは、われわれが制御できる環境の一部であり、コンテクストとはこの形に要求を与える環境の一部である。自然界でもそうだが、よいデザインとはよい適合であり、形とコンテクストが摩擦なしに共存している状態なのだ。
[[クリストファー・アレグザンダー―建築の新しいパラダイムを求めて>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4875021534]], p. 53
>「よいデザインの家は、コンテクストにうまく適合しているだけでなく、コンテクストが何であるかがはっきりとわかるようになっている。」
[[クリストファー・アレグザンダー―建築の新しいパラダイムを求めて>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4875021534]], p. 53
*デザインの失敗
> そんなとき、なぜかは忘れたが、休み時間中に筆者自身の「失敗」の話をしたのである。「こんなことをやっちゃったら、こんなにまずくなった」「あんなことをやったら、火事が出た」「そんなことをやったら、吹っ飛んで死にそうになった」といった、筆者自身の体験談である。筆者としては自分の失敗談であるから本当に恥ずかしい話である。ところがどういうわけか、これがじつに学生の受けが良い。みんな、じつに面白そうに聞くのである。～省略～
> これを見ていて感じたことがある。筆者が最初に行っていた設計の授業は、「うまくいくこと」を教えようとしていた。しかし、誰もそんなものは欲しくなかったのである。学生は「うまくいく能書き」ではなく、「まずくいく道筋」が知りたかったのである。誰でも自分なりに歩くルートを決めるときには、「まずくいく道筋」を知りながら自分でルートを作って歩いて行きたい。学生たちは、「まずくいく道筋」の話を聞いて、自分たちが求めていたものに初めて気づいたのである。そして、筆者自身も、本当に教えるべきことは何かについて気づかされたのである。
[[技術の創造と設計>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4000052446]], pp. 78-79
*その他
4. What do you consider the most neglected topics and/or
contributions in late 20th century studies of computation
and/or information?
One of areas that deserves more focus is the understanding of
the process of design. Simon's early work on this area
(The Sciences of the Artificial) provides a starting point from
within the cognitive paradigm. We need to move beyond that view
and extend it to capture the richness of the design practices we
see in the practice of technology development. We can see what
people produce, but have few clear models of how they can do that
effectively.
[[Philosophy of Computing and Information: 5 Questions>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/8792130097]], pp. 174-175
*ジャーナル
-[[Design Issues>http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/desi?cookieSet=1]]
-[[Journal of Engineering Design>http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713429619~db=all]]
-[[Research in Engineering Design>http://www.springer.com/east/home?SGWID=5-102-70-1012905-detailsPage=journal|description&changeHeader=true&SHORTCUT=www.springer.com/journal/00163/about]]
-[[Journal of Design Research>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=192#submission]]
-[[CoDesign>http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t716100698~db=all]]
-[[Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=AIE]]
-[[Design Research Quarterly>http://www.drsq.org/]]
-[[Design Studies>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0142694X]]
**意思決定
-[[Decision Support Systems>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01679236]]
*記事
-[[デザインアドバイスの根拠としての、推測 vs. データ>http://www.usability.gr.jp/alertbox/20090608_guesses-data.html]], Alertbox 2009
-[[Casting Software Design in the Function-Behavior-Structure Framework>https://sourceforge.wpi.edu/sf/docman/do/listDocuments/projects.cs4233_course_materials/docman.root.supplementary_reading]]
*ワークショップ
-[[Psychology of Programming Interest Group (PPIG)>http://www.ppig.org/]]
*プレゼンテーション資料
-[[Modularity in Design>http://www.cs.drexel.edu/~yfcai/Presentations.html]], Yuanfang Cai
-[[http://www.humboldt.edu/~sod/symposium/pdfs/SoD%202007%20-%20CREATIVE%20THINKING%20Cross.pdf>http://www.humboldt.edu/~sod/symposium/pdfs/SoD%202007%20-%20CREATIVE%20THINKING%20Cross.pdf]]
*関係
> この章では、関係という言葉の意味を明確にし、私たちが意識的あるいは無意識に、さまざまな状況での一連の行動を通じて関係を築いていることを述べた。その意味で、関係は「デザインして進化する」ものだと言える。そして、デザイン・プロセスは、２人（またはグループ）が交わす最初のひところから、あるいは、監督責任者と新入社員が初めて顔を合わせる瞬間から始まる。
-[[謙虚なリーダーシップ]], p.76
*文献
-[[Does using different concept generation techniques change the design cognition of designers>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], 2012
-[[Design as a social process: a complex systems perspective>http://design.open.ac.uk/alexiou/]]
-[[A framework for constructive design rational>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2010.html]], Design Computing and Cognition'10, 2010
-[[Generalizing design cognition research>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], DTRS8, 2010
-[[ Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems>http://www.cognexus.org/Rotman-interview_SharedUnderstanding.pdf]], 2009, PDF
-[[The structure of design revolutions: Kuhnian paradigm shifts in creative problem solving]], Design Issues, 2010
-[[デザイン学の課題と研究方法—概念生成と創造性の視点から—>http://www.research.kobe-u.ac.jp/eng-mech-design/taura/speech-j.html]]
-[[Developmental trajectories in design thinking: an examination of criteria>http://bit.ly/aA6isy]], Design Studies, 2010
-[[Variants of design cognition>http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/oa04/publications_conference_articles.html]]
-[[ Understanding the behaviours of a situated agent: A Markov chain analysis>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Knowledge-Based Systems
-[[Understanding innovation as a change of value systems>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], 3rd IFIP Working Conference on Computer Aided Innovation 2009
-[[Exploring knowledge transfer in a society of designers>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], ICED09
-[[Biologically Inspired Design: Human Reasoning from Nature's Experiences>http://home.cc.gatech.edu/dil/6]], 2009
-[[Using the FBS ontology to capture semantic design information in design protocol studies>]], About: Designing. Analysing Design Meetings, 2009
-[[Designed as Designer>http://www.dreamsongs.org/DesignedAsDesigner.html]], OOSPLA 2008
-[[An ontological account of Donald Schon's reflection in designing>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Design Sciences and Technology, 2009
-[[Designerly Ways of Knowing: design discipline versus design science>http://design.open.ac.uk/cross/publications.htm]]
-[[Why Horst W.J. Rittel Matters>http://www.dubberly.com/articles/why-horst-wj-rittel-matters.html]]
-[[The Product Ecology: Understanding Social Product Use and Supporting Design Culture>http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/index]]
-[[Design Problems and Design Paradoxes>http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4]]
-[[Computational analogy making in designing: A process architecture>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]], CAADRIA 2008
-[[Critical Design Ethnography: Designing For Change>http://inkido.indiana.edu/research/onlinemanu/]]
-[[Learning to collaborate during team designing: Some preliminary results from measurement-based tools>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Research into Design 2009
-[[Using a generic method to study software design cognition>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2010.html]]
**デザインの科学
-[[The Sciences of Design: Observations on an Emerging Field>http://www.hbs.edu/research/facpubs/workingpapers/papers0809.html#wp09-056]], HBS WP 2008
**その他
-[[Literature Study on Design Rationale and Design Decision Documentation>http://www.kth.se/itm/inst/mmk/org/MDA/ECS/people/biehl-matthias-1.23874?l=en_UK]], TR, 2010
*その他ページ
-[[メモ/ソフトウェアデザイン]]
-[[メモ/合理性]]
-[[メモ/問題解決]]
#contents
>「火薬の最たる効果は身を焼く炎でも切り裂く破片でもない！！ 音と光 衝撃と畏怖 恐慌（おそれ）！！」
ドリフターズ 3巻
-[[Science for Designers: The Meaning of Complexity>http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20120330/science-for-designers-the-meaning-of-complexity]]
-[[Science for Designers: The Transformation of Wholes>http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20120413/science-for-designers-the-transformation-of-wholes]]
>依頼された仕事や演奏家の才能による制約が十分にないとき、バッハは自身の創造性を刺激するために、完全に人工的な制約を導入することがあった。
-[[デザインのためのデザイン]], p.131
-[[Commonalities across designing: Evidence from models of designing and experiments>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], 2012
-[[The Nature of Design Thinking>http://www.dab.uts.edu.au/research/conferences/dtrs8/docs/DTRS8-Dorst.pdf]], 2010,
-[[Representational affordances in design, with examples from analogy making and optimization>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2011.html]], 2011
-[[Design research: a revolution-waiting-to-happen>http://faculty.washington.edu/ajko/teaching/insc541/reading/Dorst2008.pdf]]
-[[Design>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2011.html]], Encyclopedia of Creativity, 2011
> ですから本書では誤解を招く言い方ですが、まず、キャラクターとは「デザインするもの」ではなく「つくるもの」だ、と定義することから始めます。「キャラクター」を「デザイン」することは「キャラクター」を「つくる」ことの一部分を成しますが、その全てではありません。「デザインする」、つまり視覚的なレベルのみで他のキャラクターと違った新しい何かを産み出そうと工夫していても、キャラクターは「つくれない」とぼくは考えます。キャラクターの視覚的なデザインというのは、キャラクターを他人と共有するためアウトプットする工程であって、「つくること」それ自体ではありえません。
[[キャラクターメーカー]], p.17
> 環境意識の高まりや、消費者が企業にモノではなく経験を求めるようになったことがネットワークの時代とマッチして、デザイン業界のリーダーたちが言うように、デザインは「創造」から「思考」へと大きく飛躍した。デザイン的思考とは、人為的な創造のプロセスを、システムや経験を使うことで、一つひとつ別々の製品についてではなく、もっと大きな問題の解決に応用するという意味だ。
[[シェア]], p.235
> [...] こうした製品を生みだす彼の手法と考え方は、カリムのホームページで「カリマニフェスト」として紹介されている。「今、デザインは問題解決の手段ではない……すべての産業が、美を気にかけるべきだ──つまるところ、それが人間の集合的なニーズなのだから」
[[シェア]], pp.232-233
*定義・特徴
>[…] Jones (1970) has commented that ‘changing the problem in order to find a solution is the most challenging and difficult part of designing’. He also points out that ‘designing should not be confused with art, with science, or mathematics.’
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.24
>To base design theory on inappropriate paradigms of logic and science is to make a bad mistake. Logic has interests in abstract forms. Science investigates extant forms. Design initiates novel forms. March, 1976
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.24
>It has been suggested that this feature of design behaviour arises from the nature of design problems: they are not the sort of problems or puzzles that provide all the necessary and sufficient information for their solution. Some of the relevant information can only be found by generating and testing solutions; some information, or ‘missing ingredient’, has to be provided by the designer himself, as noted by Levin(1966) from his observations of urban designers. […]
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.36
>It is widely accepted that design 'problems' can only be regarded as a version of ill-defined problems. In a design project it is often not at all clear what ‘the problem’ is; it may have been only loosely defined by the client, many constraints and criteria may be un-defined, and everyone involved in the project may know that goals may be re-defined during the project. In design, ‘problem’ are often defined only in relation to ideas for their ‘solution’, and designers do not typically proceed by first attempting to define their problems rigorously.
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], pp.99--100
>[…] The difference was observed by Lawson (1979), in his experiments on problem-solving behaviour in which he compared scientists with architects. Designers are solution-focused, unlike problem-focused scientists.
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], p.101
>One of the dangers in this new field of design research is that researchers from other, non-design, disciplines will import methods and approaches that are inappropriate to developing the understanding of design. Researchers from psychology or computer science, for example, have tended to assume that there is ‘nothing special’ about design as an activity for investigation, that it is just another form of ‘problem solving’ or ‘information processing’. However, developments in artificial intelligence and other computer modelling in design have perhaps served mainly to demonstrate just how high-level and complex is the cognitive ability of designers, and how much more research is needed to understand it. […]
[[Designerly Ways of Knowing>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/3764384840]], pp.126--127
**プロダクト
Designs are the instructions, based on knowledge, that turn
resources into things people use and value.
Carliss Y. Baldwin, [[Design Theory and Methods>http://www.people.hbs.edu/cbaldwin/]]
**プロセス
It is based on the idea that every design problem begins
with an effort to achieve fitness between two entities: the
form in question and its context. The form is the solution
to the problem; the context defines the problem. In other
words, when we speak of design, the real object of discussion
is not the form alone, but the ensemble comprising the form
and its context. Good fit is a property of this ensemble
which relates to some particular division of the ensemble
into form and context.
[[Notes on the Synthesis of Form]], pp. 15-16
Thus, design is purposeful and the activity of designing is
goal-oriented. The meta-goal of design is to transform
requirements, more generally termed functions which embody
the expectations of the purposes of the resulting artefact,
into design descriptions.
The result of the activity of designing is a design description.
This design description generally is represented graphically,
numerically, and/or textually. The purpose of such a description
is to transfer sufficient information about the designed
artefact so that it can be manufactured, fabricated or constructed.
[[Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/1990.html]]
>Designing is a process that aims to create the structure (S) of artefacts that meet a set of requirements stated as functions (F) and possible behaviours (B)
[[Creative designing: An ontological view>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]]
>[...] Design is the process of inventing objects -- our "things" -- that perform specific functions. [...]
[[Design Rules>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Design-Rules-Modularity-Carliss-Baldwin/dp/0262024667/]], p. 2
>This is compatible with a widely held view among designers that design is an attempt at global optimization with finite resources.
[[Sketches of Thought>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Sketches-Thought-Bradford-Books-Vinod/dp/0262071630/]], p. 256
>Design, at some very abstract level, is the process of transforming one set of representations (the design brief) into another set of representations (the contract documents).
[[Sketches of Thought>http://www.amazon.co.jp/Sketches-Thought-Bradford-Books-Vinod/dp/0262071630/]], p. 128
[...] In the balance of this section I will review studies
where the experimental design involve the manipulation
between heuristic and formal strategies.[...]
[[Cognitive Neuroscience of Thinking>http://www.yorku.ca/vgoel/pub.frame.html]]
Designing is an activity during which designers perform
actions in order to change their environment.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
[...] Schön and Wiggins (1992) found that designers use
their sketches not only as an external memory, but also as
a means to reinterpret what they have drawn, thus leading
the design in a new direction.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
Situated designing, whether carried out by humans or a
design system, uses first-person knowledge grounded in the
designer’s interactions with their environment (Bickhard
and Campbell 1996; Clancey 1997; Ziemke 1999; Smith and
Gero 2005). This is in contrast to static approaches that
attempt to encode all relevant design knowledge prior to
its use. Evidence in support of first-person knowledge is
provided by the fact that different designers are likely
to produce different designs for the same set of requirements.
And the same designer is likely to produce different designs
at different points in time even though the same requirements
are presented. This is a result of the designer acquiring
new knowledge while interacting with their environment.
[[A Function-Behaviour-Structure ontology of processes>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]]
*よいデザイン
>彼はデザインの最終目的は形であり、デザインの問題は、形をコンテクストに適合させることだとしている。形とは、われわれが制御できる環境の一部であり、コンテクストとはこの形に要求を与える環境の一部である。自然界でもそうだが、よいデザインとはよい適合であり、形とコンテクストが摩擦なしに共存している状態なのだ。
[[クリストファー・アレグザンダー―建築の新しいパラダイムを求めて>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4875021534]], p. 53
>「よいデザインの家は、コンテクストにうまく適合しているだけでなく、コンテクストが何であるかがはっきりとわかるようになっている。」
[[クリストファー・アレグザンダー―建築の新しいパラダイムを求めて>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4875021534]], p. 53
*デザインの失敗
> そんなとき、なぜかは忘れたが、休み時間中に筆者自身の「失敗」の話をしたのである。「こんなことをやっちゃったら、こんなにまずくなった」「あんなことをやったら、火事が出た」「そんなことをやったら、吹っ飛んで死にそうになった」といった、筆者自身の体験談である。筆者としては自分の失敗談であるから本当に恥ずかしい話である。ところがどういうわけか、これがじつに学生の受けが良い。みんな、じつに面白そうに聞くのである。～省略～
> これを見ていて感じたことがある。筆者が最初に行っていた設計の授業は、「うまくいくこと」を教えようとしていた。しかし、誰もそんなものは欲しくなかったのである。学生は「うまくいく能書き」ではなく、「まずくいく道筋」が知りたかったのである。誰でも自分なりに歩くルートを決めるときには、「まずくいく道筋」を知りながら自分でルートを作って歩いて行きたい。学生たちは、「まずくいく道筋」の話を聞いて、自分たちが求めていたものに初めて気づいたのである。そして、筆者自身も、本当に教えるべきことは何かについて気づかされたのである。
[[技術の創造と設計>http://www.amazon.co.jp/dp/4000052446]], pp. 78-79
*その他
4. What do you consider the most neglected topics and/or
contributions in late 20th century studies of computation
and/or information?
One of areas that deserves more focus is the understanding of
the process of design. Simon's early work on this area
(The Sciences of the Artificial) provides a starting point from
within the cognitive paradigm. We need to move beyond that view
and extend it to capture the richness of the design practices we
see in the practice of technology development. We can see what
people produce, but have few clear models of how they can do that
effectively.
[[Philosophy of Computing and Information: 5 Questions>http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/8792130097]], pp. 174-175
*ジャーナル
-[[Design Issues>http://www.mitpressjournals.org/loi/desi?cookieSet=1]]
-[[Journal of Engineering Design>http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713429619~db=all]]
-[[Research in Engineering Design>http://www.springer.com/east/home?SGWID=5-102-70-1012905-detailsPage=journal|description&changeHeader=true&SHORTCUT=www.springer.com/journal/00163/about]]
-[[Journal of Design Research>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=192#submission]]
-[[CoDesign>http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t716100698~db=all]]
-[[Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing>http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=AIE]]
-[[Design Research Quarterly>http://www.drsq.org/]]
-[[Design Studies>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0142694X]]
**意思決定
-[[Decision Support Systems>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01679236]]
*記事
-[[デザインアドバイスの根拠としての、推測 vs. データ>http://www.usability.gr.jp/alertbox/20090608_guesses-data.html]], Alertbox 2009
-[[Casting Software Design in the Function-Behavior-Structure Framework>https://sourceforge.wpi.edu/sf/docman/do/listDocuments/projects.cs4233_course_materials/docman.root.supplementary_reading]]
*ワークショップ
-[[Psychology of Programming Interest Group (PPIG)>http://www.ppig.org/]]
*プレゼンテーション資料
-[[Modularity in Design>http://www.cs.drexel.edu/~yfcai/Presentations.html]], Yuanfang Cai
-[[http://www.humboldt.edu/~sod/symposium/pdfs/SoD%202007%20-%20CREATIVE%20THINKING%20Cross.pdf>http://www.humboldt.edu/~sod/symposium/pdfs/SoD%202007%20-%20CREATIVE%20THINKING%20Cross.pdf]]
*関係
>この章では、関係という言葉の意味を明確にし、私たちが意識的あるいは無意識に、さまざまな状況での一連の行動を通じて関係を築いていることを述べた。その意味で、関係は「デザインして進化する」ものだと言える。そして、デザイン・プロセスは、２人（またはグループ）が交わす最初のひところから、あるいは、監督責任者と新入社員が初めて顔を合わせる瞬間から始まる。
-[[謙虚なリーダーシップ]], p.76
*文献
-[[Does using different concept generation techniques change the design cognition of designers>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], 2012
-[[Design as a social process: a complex systems perspective>http://design.open.ac.uk/alexiou/]]
-[[A framework for constructive design rational>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2010.html]], Design Computing and Cognition'10, 2010
-[[Generalizing design cognition research>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero/publications/progress.html]], DTRS8, 2010
-[[ Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems>http://www.cognexus.org/Rotman-interview_SharedUnderstanding.pdf]], 2009, PDF
-[[The structure of design revolutions: Kuhnian paradigm shifts in creative problem solving]], Design Issues, 2010
-[[デザイン学の課題と研究方法—概念生成と創造性の視点から—>http://www.research.kobe-u.ac.jp/eng-mech-design/taura/speech-j.html]]
-[[Developmental trajectories in design thinking: an examination of criteria>http://bit.ly/aA6isy]], Design Studies, 2010
-[[Variants of design cognition>http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/oa04/publications_conference_articles.html]]
-[[ Understanding the behaviours of a situated agent: A Markov chain analysis>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Knowledge-Based Systems
-[[Understanding innovation as a change of value systems>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], 3rd IFIP Working Conference on Computer Aided Innovation 2009
-[[Exploring knowledge transfer in a society of designers>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], ICED09
-[[Biologically Inspired Design: Human Reasoning from Nature's Experiences>http://home.cc.gatech.edu/dil/6]], 2009
-[[Using the FBS ontology to capture semantic design information in design protocol studies>]], About: Designing. Analysing Design Meetings, 2009
-[[Designed as Designer>http://www.dreamsongs.org/DesignedAsDesigner.html]], OOSPLA 2008
-[[An ontological account of Donald Schon's reflection in designing>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Design Sciences and Technology, 2009
-[[Designerly Ways of Knowing: design discipline versus design science>http://design.open.ac.uk/cross/publications.htm]]
-[[Why Horst W.J. Rittel Matters>http://www.dubberly.com/articles/why-horst-wj-rittel-matters.html]]
-[[The Product Ecology: Understanding Social Product Use and Supporting Design Culture>http://www.ijdesign.org/ojs/index.php/IJDesign/index]]
-[[Design Problems and Design Paradoxes>http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4]]
-[[Computational analogy making in designing: A process architecture>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2008.html]], CAADRIA 2008
-[[Critical Design Ethnography: Designing For Change>http://inkido.indiana.edu/research/onlinemanu/]]
-[[Learning to collaborate during team designing: Some preliminary results from measurement-based tools>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2009.html]], Research into Design 2009
-[[Using a generic method to study software design cognition>http://mason.gmu.edu/~jgero//publications/2010.html]]
**デザインの科学
-[[The Sciences of Design: Observations on an Emerging Field>http://www.hbs.edu/research/facpubs/workingpapers/papers0809.html#wp09-056]], HBS WP 2008
**その他
-[[Literature Study on Design Rationale and Design Decision Documentation>http://www.kth.se/itm/inst/mmk/org/MDA/ECS/people/biehl-matthias-1.23874?l=en_UK]], TR, 2010
*その他ページ
-[[メモ/ソフトウェアデザイン]]
-[[メモ/合理性]]
-[[メモ/問題解決]]
