| 1 |
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 12:27:35 -0500 |
| 2 |
R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Up until now I had not been sure my messages were readable. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Take it as a compliment, at least 1 of the possible warnock[1] reasons |
| 7 |
are favourable :) |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> us·er ex·pe·ri·ence |
| 10 |
> noun: user experience; plural noun: user experiences |
| 11 |
> the overall experience of a person using a product such as a |
| 12 |
> website or computer application, especially in terms of how easy or |
| 13 |
> pleasing it is to use. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> From this definition, I see no connection to anything graphical. To |
| 16 |
> the extent that words have meaning I think the selection of "ux-*" |
| 17 |
> would be a mistake. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Respectfully, |
| 20 |
> R0b0t1 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yeah. Prescriptively you are right. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
"UX" is not "A thing", it is not a piece of software, or even a |
| 25 |
category of software. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
"UX" is something software *produces* |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
In truth, it was much more about the "X" in the name as a minor |
| 30 |
feature, because well, this is geekery, and we do things like this. :) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
For instance, git master for perl is called "blead" ... |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
And GNU's Not Unix. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
But yes, I do agree its not ideal still. But I'll try to think of other |
| 37 |
terms that can sneak an "x" into them ;) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma#Original_description |
Archives