MetaDesign

From APIDesign

For a while I am thinking about various types of design. Do they have anything in common or are they really different? Certain adventures I have been to may indicate that there is just one MetaDesign which is then applied to different target audience, different technology, etc. Other events I've been to ensure me that there are hard to overcome differences. I want this page to hold thoughts that will reveal the truth: Is there MetaDesign or not?

For the API architects out there I recommend http://architypes.net/ it is really entertaining read. Not always mappable to our field, but interesting. Antonio also pointed out that Gang of Four book is heavily inspired by work of Christopher Alexander.

For those who doubt there can be any kind of MetaDesign at all I'd like to share following experience. Once I saw a slide with guidelines of good UI design written by our HIE lead. I have stolen them and since then I am using them to describe rules of good API design. The match is perfect. So yes, user interface and API design has to have something in common.

Blame the Architect!

One common problem shared among various types of architects is the legalized irresponsibility for the result. Few times I have dealt with architects who design something and when that something is passed to production, they don't feel responsible for physical issues. If the design looks nice on the paper, who cares whether it can also be realized!?

The problem is that all users of the design usually care more about the reality than the original plans. It is my believe (also expressed many times in TheAPIBook) that architects' work should be evaluated few years after their proposal started to be used. The goal of almost any project is to solve real-world issues, so architect's work shall finish when the issues are really solved. Solved not only for one opening day, but forever (or at least few years).

The above picture illustrates one case of such failed design. I've been at the planning meeting for the redesign of this square and saw its architect and the plans. Everything looked so nice on the paper! But the reality is not that perfect. The amount of garbage around the containers makes the whole scene look really desperately.

One may blame the people putting the garbage there (and sure they deserve to be blamed) however this is still fault of the architect. It is his responsibility that there is a garbage container in middle of such nice square! Either he should not have put it there at all, or he should have organized courses to teach people how to properly use his own creation. None of that happened. I am sure the architect thought his work finished at the opening ceremony. Shame on him!

This is so similar to API design! Many people I've met care about the design only until the opening ceremony. Whether it is ready for evolution, whether it is used properly by its clueless users does not interest them. That is bad, architects shall be responsible for the long term use of their designs. Architects shall also be conservative and expect their designs are going to be used with complete cluelessness without learning much about the proper use.

Dear architects, don't put trashcans in middle of your parks!

To Be Continued

I am continuing to visit an architect who I asked to design furniture in my house, so stay tuned. I will have fresh observations to share...

Share!

If you have any comments on this topic, don't be afraid to share them.

<comments/>