Design language: Difference between revisions

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 34: Line 34:
* Gibbons, Andrew, S. and Erin K. Brewer, (2005) “Elementary principles of design languages and design notation systems for instructional design”. In J.M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaack, and D. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations to instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah NJ, pp. 111-129.
* Gibbons, Andrew, S. and Erin K. Brewer, (2005) “Elementary principles of design languages and design notation systems for instructional design”. In J.M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaack, and D. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations to instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah NJ, pp. 111-129.


* Waters, Sandie, H. & Andrew, S. Gibbons (2004). Design languages, notation systems, and instructional technology: A case study: ''Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 57-69.
* Waters, Sandie, H. & Andrew, S. Gibbons (2004). Design languages, notation systems, and instructional technology: A case study: ''Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 57-69. [http://www.aect.org/pdf/etr&d/5202/5202-04.pdf PDF] {{ar}}


[[Category: design methodologies]]
[[Category: design methodologies]]
[[Category: Educational modeling languages]]
[[Category: Educational modeling languages]]

Revision as of 14:26, 7 November 2007

Draft

Definition

  • “Design languages, formal or intuitive, lie at the heart of all design and development processes and tools.” (Gibbons & Brewer, 2005:111).
  • A design language is “a tool that designers use to communicate designs, plans, and intentions to each other and to the users of their artifacts” (Botturi, 2006: 268)

See also:

Dimensions of Design Languages

Gibbons & Brewer (2005:115-118) distinguish the following dimensions along which design languages may vary:

  • Complexity
  • Precision
  • Formality & standardization
  • Personal vs. shared
  • Implicit vs. explicit
  • standardized vs. nonstandardized
  • computability

Examples

References

  • Botturi, L. (2006). E2ML. A visual language for the design of instruction. Educational Technologies Research & Development, 54(3), 265-293. Abstract/PDF (Access restricted)
  • Gibbons, A. S. (2003). What and how designers design? A theory of design structure. TechTrends, 47(5), 22–27. PDF (Access restricted)
  • Gibbons, Andrew, S. and Erin K. Brewer, (2005) “Elementary principles of design languages and design notation systems for instructional design”. In J.M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaack, and D. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations to instructional technology: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah NJ, pp. 111-129.
  • Waters, Sandie, H. & Andrew, S. Gibbons (2004). Design languages, notation systems, and instructional technology: A case study: Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 57-69. PDF (Access restricted)