<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Stuart Cullum</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/11089</link>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:45:34 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Stuart Cullum</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Wireframes are, for me, ideal when presenting the essence of an idea to a client. The client understands how they want the application to work from a business logic pov, but needs to &amp;#8216;see&amp;#8217; this replicated in the screen design&amp;#8230; this immediacy, even in the very early analysis stage, can give the client and team confidence &amp;#8211; and give you important feedback. Generally, my next step is to produce a high quality / detailed &lt;span class="caps"&gt;PDF&lt;/span&gt; demo of the proposed app, only a couple of important screens required &amp;#8211; this generates excitement and enthusiasm for the project, mainly because the client is now able to visualise how the app will function for them. Then task a developer to produce a simple coded demo, involve a bit more logic and then when sign-off is achieved, go into production with the team knowing what the end product will hopefully function / look / feel like.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;I find most techniques work and have value, it&amp;#8217;s down to your experience to decide which to use and when. Great article and discussion, thanks.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the_guided_wire#content_12575</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/the_guided_wire#content_12575</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:45:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Stuart Cullum</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

