<?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 Laura Stephens</title>
    <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/person/13567</link>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 03:37:38 GMT</pubDate>
    <description>Comments by Laura Stephens</description>
    <item>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I believe that wireframes or schematics have their own place within the web design process.  Adding designed visual elements to the page such as colour and images distracts from the main purpose of a wireframe which is to make sure the right information is on the page and placed in the right priority and hierarchy.&lt;/p&gt;

	&lt;p&gt;Clients will get distracted and caught up in commenting on the design, when that phase will come later.  Perhaps the Information architect should focus more setting the expectation and communicating to the client exactly what the purpose of a wireframe  is rather than adding visual elements.  It doesn&amp;#8217;t mean to say schematics can&amp;#8217;t look &amp;#8216;designed&amp;#8217; to a certain extent but they should know their limit.  Then visual designers can start a-fresh working from the schematics/wireframes.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/real_wireframes#content_31673</link>
      <guid>http://www.boxesandarrows.com/view/real_wireframes#content_31673</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 03:37:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Laura Stephens</author>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

