<?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 Matt Rea</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/120410</link>
    <pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 05:55:08 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Matt Rea</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Nice post. I&amp;#8217;ve found similar things in my experiences designing for desktop apps&amp;#8230; Sketchy wireframes (as opposed to higher fidelity) tend to elicit more &amp;amp; better feedback about higher level interactions and architecture (once you take visual design off the table). In desktop apps, where much of the look and feel of components is determined by the OS chrome, some of the sketchy wireframes can even make it into specs that are handed off to the development team.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;In many ways it mirrors the process of logo design where the designer first concentrates on the composition of the mark before introducing colors and other elements.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;For those people using Illustrator, I&amp;#8217;ve created some sketchy templates of various components (windows, dialogs, controls, etc.) that can be used in wireframing or prototyping.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://matthewrea.com/07.21.09/Sketchy-Illustrator-wireframes/41.php" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://matthewrea.com/07.21.09/Sketchy-Illustrator-wirefr&amp;hellip;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/sketchy-wireframes#content_49983</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/sketchy-wireframes#content_49983</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 05:55:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Matt Rea</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

