Boxes and Arrows: Comments by Mark Kraemer

Mark Kraemer — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:17:03 GMT

Fidelity for prototypes can be roughly measured by 3 attributes: visual detail, functional depth, and technical reuse. The obvious trade-offs are the more realistic any of these attributes becomes, the most cost there is involved. The effort for including visual detail on each page I think is discounted above when you consider the cost of maintaining that consistent style over multiple pages, unless you increase the technical reuse attribute as well (CSS) which in turn provides more cost.

I don’t think there’s a single silver bullet / best practice for how to prototype for every single project. One should consider who the prototype is for (investors? the client’s business analyst? end users in usability testing? your developers?) Each group will have different needs in each of the 3 attributes. Design your prototype to meet the needs of these interim users and you’ll find the right balance of cost/value for visual detail, functional depth, and technical reuse.

Mark Kraemer — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:54:12 GMT

Nice article. The graphic does a good job to comparing different prototyping styles.

When I discuss the same idea, I add another dimension of “Technical Reuse” to help with the argument of rework and throw-away code.

Take a look if you’re interested in the topic at the presentations posted here:
http://markup.thekraemers.com/2006/09/14/links-from-the-h…

Mark Kraemer — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:32:24 GMT

I explained these three dimensions a bit more eloquently commenting on this story a few years ago:
http://boxesandarrows.com/view/real_wireframes