Charles Hall
Jul 28, 2017 · 1 min read

Frankly, this is the core problem — not the argument (development knowledge) itself. By continuing to oversimplify, understate and rely on ambiguity and analogies that nearly always miss the mark, any subsequent argument is rendered moot. As an industry of professionals, it seems we first need to arrive at a common definition and understanding of the terms “experience” and “interface”. Then, we can move on to engage in more philosophical debate of what skills and criteria help support the thinking, tasks and activities associated with each.

And by the way, the same dilemma exists in other disciplines. These terms are all often generalized, misused and misunderstood: “development”, “programming”, “engineering”, “front-end”, “back-end”, “full-stack”, “coding”, and “computer science”.

Please stop perpetuating the idea that this issue is binary — that there are only those for or against. It is far more complex than that. Fundamentally, learning a skill is always valuable, so instead, you could choose to not argue about it at all.

    Charles Hall

    Written by

    helping humans help humans through technology. chief curiosity officer @hall_media. senior ux architect @MRMMcCannDet.