<?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 Charlie Nichols</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/1356</link>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:16 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Charlie Nichols</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Good stuff. &lt;br /&gt;I&amp;#8217;ve used what I call &amp;#8220;frankensteins,&amp;#8221; part wireframe, part real page elements for a while.  Similar to what Steven points out, &lt;br /&gt;assuming we are designing new areas for an existing site, we can use real headers, real images and even real visuals of form elements/text.  I also agree with real explaination text, as lorem ipsum doesn&amp;#8217;t transmit enough information to business users.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;Zef Fugaz&amp;#8217;s above comments are good too, these can be another step in different documentation that delivers to different needs.  I&amp;#8217;ve had to deliver upwards of 4 different &amp;#8220;site/content maps&amp;#8221; to a client, all valid &amp;#8220;site/content maps&amp;#8221; but all showing different perspectives of the data at hand. We sent different docs to different stakeholders that had different priorities.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/real_wireframes#content_3608</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/real_wireframes#content_3608</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Charlie Nichols</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
