[thelist] Designer vs. Coder

bsugrue at Automationdirect.com bsugrue at Automationdirect.com
Mon Feb 26 17:47:17 CST 2001


I think we tend to make this more complicated than it really is or will be.
To remove some of the confusing designer/coder issues, I like to use a "low
tech" model that is hundreds of years old AND actually profitable in some
cases - the humble newspaper.

As (mass) printing was an emerging technology, people also learned and
performed most functions of production.  You wrote the articles yourself or
at least were the editor.  You did your own layout of course, possibly
literally cutting and pasting.  Then you published it yourself or were at
least intimately involved in getting your layout on paper.  That's a gross
generalization of course of how an industry began, but there are parallels
between early printing or radio broadcasting and WWW publishing growing from
self-taught hobbies to "industries".  

That had to change.  Printing processes had to change in order to scale and
publish thousands of copies.  As complexities within the medium grew, the
need for specialization was a natural evolution.

When I occasionally cover a sporting event for an online publication, the
print beat writer for a major city newspaper next to me works only in a word
processor on his laptop.  It could be some DOS relic for all the reader
cares.  All he does and all he has to do is write.  Generate content.  And
do it well.   

My reporter friend really isn't concerned if the newsroom is using Quark or
whatever layout engine newspapers use.  He plugs his story into the
highly-evolved content management system (which he did not have to code
himself).  Then the editors and layout people take over and the story is
matched with appropriate artwork (which our intrepid reporter also doesn't
have to sketch himself), and everything is fit onto the mocked-up page.

Then the paper goes to press.  A modern printing press approaches an
airplane in complexity.  So there are also specific skills that go into
publication.

Unless I'm grossly oversimplifying, I see a very familiar three roles
emerge:

1) Content:  text, art, advertisements, whatever.  All generated by people
very good at it.
2) Design:  how do we arrange this content in the most readable (and
profitable) structure?
3) Production:  how do we make sure that the reader sees the design as the
layout intended?

I don't want my reporter friend troubleshooting the printing press to make
sure his story gets in the next day's edition.  He needs to be asking the
coach some insightful questions in order to separate his content from his
competitor's content.

At the same time, the reporter must have a working knowledge of the space he
or she will be allowed within the layout or else might ramble on like this
missive.  The editor has to have a clue about content in order to give
context.  They are competent in several areas.  Knowledge in the other
functions helps you do your job better, but only to a point where you don't
become overextended and spread too thin so that your core job and skills are
affected.

As web sites become more complex (also due to sheer volume and scale), a
similar specialization is occurring.  I wouldn't be afraid of it but I would
learn specific skills REALLY WELL.  The days of people (myself included) who
could call ourselves web designers and try to do entire sites because we
could use Notepad to make a functional page are fading away.  Really quality
designers can do better layout, better writers can produce superior content,
and competent programmers can make site management and generation much
smoother.  People like myself who became web generalists by necessity really
do need to decide what we do well.  I've chosen the programming end - we'll
see how that flies.

There are still very small print publications done entirely by one or two
people who know everything about it from soup to nuts.  But most
publications, and probably more importantly, most jobs are in specialized
fields for very skilled  people.  I don't see why our industry will evolve
much differently over the long term as the market matures from "internet
companies" into "companies using the internet".               
        
Brian...sorry for the length


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeana [mailto:kumquat at sckans.edu]

>If we seperate content and design, are we also seperating the >jobs?


I think there are people who can do both. I have lots of experience in
design and graphics, while I also have some skills in coding and scripting.
Am I really really really good at both? No. I obviously am stronger in some
areas and weaker in others.

People can do both, but to be considered a 'great god-like-guru'  in either
area would require a detailed level of experience and dedication. 

Typically I find people who are really really really good at design don't
have the 'right-brain' power required for serious coding.. and vice versa..
people who are extremely confident on the code side usually don't use their
'left-brain' very much. 

I think if you have a team environment, separating skills works well. If
you're over worked and a huge geek with a creative streak, there is no
reason why you can't at least be competent in both areas.

or at least that's my take.

Sir Kerkness
- a good like guru in my own right.. ;)




More information about the thelist mailing list