Putting It All Together: Towards a Pattern Language for Interaction Design
Summary Report of the CHI '97 Workshop
- Elisabeth Bayle, Bayle Collaborations
- Rachel Bellamy, Apple Computer
- George Casaday, Marcam Corporation
- Thomas Erickson, Apple Computer
- Sally Fincher, University of Kent at Canterbury
- Beki Grinter, Lucent Technologies
- Ben Gross, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
- Diane Lehder, AT&T Labs
- Hans Marmolin, UI Design
- Brian Moore, Texas Instruments
- Colin Potts, Georgia Tech
- Grant Skousen, Consultant
- John Thomas, NYNEX
Pattern languages are representations that have been used in architecture and
urban design for about twenty years. They focus on the interaction between physical
form and social behavior, and express design solutions in an understandable
and generalizable form. But pattern languages are not simply set of patterns
intended to be universally applied; instead, they are actually meta-languages
which, when used in a particular situations, generate situated design languages.
This report describes a CHI 97 workshop which explored the utility of pattern
languages for interaction design. We discuss the workshop's rationale, the structure
and process of the workshop, and some of the workshop's results. In particular,
we describe some patterns developed as part of the workshop, and our consequent
reflections on the use of patterns and pattern languages as lingua franca
for interaction design. This report concludes with a bibliography on pattern
languages and related matters that spans architecture, software design, and
1.1. The Challenge: Complexity and Diversity
Interaction design is becoming an increasingly complex and diverse activity.
It is becoming more complex in that communications and computational technologies,
as they become cheaper and smaller, are being integrated into more devices and
embedded in more environments. This, in turn, makes interaction design relevant
for an increasing number of new application domains. And even as the space of
design possibilities increases, workplace studies are making us aware of the
complexity of the socio-technical systems within which we are working to integrate
new technologies. How are we to manage this complexity?
Interaction design is becoming more diverse in that a wider range of people
are becoming involved in it. Within CHI, it is well accepted that anthropologists,
psychologists, and visual designers, as well as engineers and computer scientists,
have roles to play in systems design. As computing systems shrink in size, industrial
and product designers need to work hand in hand with systems designers. The
advent of virtual spaces create roles for architects and interior designers.
The commercialization of video and multimedia technologies create roles for
musicians, film producers, et al. While the multidisciplinary nature of interaction
design brings much richness, it is also challenging because no common perspective,
set of practices, or theoretical orientation can be assumed.
Another factor driving the diversification of interaction design is customization.
As systems become increasingly customizable, more and more design - in the sense
of front end creation, application programming, and software configuration -
is being done in-house. Sometimes this means that traditional MIS departments
are playing a role; sometimes it means that external consultants are involved;
sometimes it means that end users themselves participate. In many cases these
participants lack the time, resources, or inclination to engage in research
on the needs and practices of their users. And, in many cases, these participants
lack formal training in design, and hence any common perspective or language.
1.2. A Possible Solution: Pattern Languages
So, we have a rapidly expanding game: more players and more technology projected
onto workplaces which we are learning more and more about. This increasing complexity
and diversity can be source of richness, or of chaos. Thus, we need to explore
ways of dealing with the increasing complexity and diversity of the interaction
design field. This workshop explored one approach to putting it all together
through a common language. Our model is the work of Christopher Alexander and
his colleagues who over the last few decades have looked at what works and what
doesn't work in architecture and urban design. The basic approach is to closely
examine particular cases, attempt to identify recurring patterns and integrate
them into a language of relatively concrete patterns. Their work is codified
in the book A Pattern Language : each pattern is described; examples
are given; empirical data supporting the pattern are referenced; and the relationships
to other patterns are defined. The way of using the patterns, that is, the process
of design, is described in a companion volume, The Timeless Way of Building
Let's take a brief look at Alexander's Pattern Language. The language consists
of a network of over 250 patterns. The patterns cover a range of scales, from
a pattern for the distribution of towns and cities to patterns for walls and
room sizes. The patterns are loosely connected across scales: any given pattern
typically points to smaller scale patterns which can support it, and larger
scale patterns in which it may participate. For example, a pattern called "Identifiable
Neighborhood" (aimed, obviously enough, at creating neighborhoods with
their own particular sense of place) will involve a number of lower level patterns.
Possibilities include "Street Cafe", "Individually Owned Shops",
"Corner Grocery", "Beer Hall", and so on. At the same time,
"Identifiable Neighborhood" participates in larger scale patterns
that specify characteristics of communities.
Now let's look at a few examples of individual patterns, though these short
summaries do not give the full flavor of the careful analysis and data that
are contained in the complete patterns. "Eccentric Neighborhood Centers"
points out that neighborhood centers should be off-center; that is, closer to
downtown because people will tend to go toward the city center rather than away
from it. "Beer Gardens" suggests that community pubs should have activity
around the edges and large tables in the middle. This encourages people to cross
through the center and sit at the tables. By contrast, many modern bars have
very small tables, and it becomes uncomfortable for a stranger to casually approach
another because the space is too intimate. Thus, the opportunity for the pub
to serve as a cohesive force is diminished. "Gradient of Privacy"
says that there should be a gradual gradient from public to private space in
a house; e.g., from porches that look on the street life to entry ways to public
rooms to family rooms to the bedroom.
These patterns focus on the interactions between the physical form of the built
environment and the way in which its form inhibits or facilitates various sorts
of personal and social behavior within it. This emphasis on the overlap between
the physical and behavioral worlds brings to mind the Gibsonian concept of affordances,
although what is going on here is much subtler: whereas saying that certain
properties of the environment afford certain actions simply means that it makes
them possible (most tables and chairs afford being stood on by a person), the
Alexandrian emphasis is on characteristics of the environment which facilitate
or inhibit (the presence of a table and chairs can facilitate people working
together or sharing food).
While these patterns describe basic ways that space should be organized in
order to have a positive impact on human feelings and behavior, we believe there
is a possibility to create something analogous for processes of human interaction.
As representations, pattern languages have very interesting properties:
- they are based on concrete prototypes drawn from the domain in which design
is being done
- they work at multiple levels - community, group, individual - and they endeavor
to tie the levels together
- they attempt to bridge the gap between the physical and social worlds
- they seem to be amenable to gradual, piecemeal development
We believe that these properties might enable pattern languages to serve as
a lingua franca for the diverse community of interaction designers.
(It should be noted that there is considerable interest in pattern languages
as vehicles for object-oriented software design reflected both books (e.g.,
[4, 5, 6]), and in conferences and mailing list activity (see the Patterns home
page at http://st-www.cs.uiuc.edu/users/patterns/).
However, as yet, there has been little attention given to pattern languages
for interaction design.)
2. The Structure of the Workshop
2.1. Goals of the Workshop
The workshop had a number of goals. The first was simply to get an idea of
where the state of the HCI community vis a vis pattern languages: Were
pattern languages simply an attractive idea, as yet untried in the domain of
interaction design? Or were pattern languages being created and used? If so,
how were they being used, and to what ends were they being applied? Second,
we wanted to share whatever knowledge and experiences workshop participants
had, so as to deepen our own understanding of patterns. Finally, we wanted to
investigate how we might further the exploration of pattern languages within
the HCI community.
The preparation for the workshop followed the usual route. We put out a call
for participants in the CHI Conference announcements, and also on a few mailing
lists that reached other relevant communities. We asked applicants to submit
position papers, and ended up with 13 participants, one more than the even dozen
we had set as our goal. Prior to the workshop we used email to develop an agenda,
and to distribute the position papers to the group.
2.3. Workshop Activities
The workshop consisted of a mixture of activities. The goal for the first day
was to get the variety of ideas and perspectives out on the table, and to develop
a shared understanding of one anothers' perspectives. This was accomplished
through a mix of long and short presentations, interspersed with discussions.
We devoted one of these sessions to the model of dialog popularized by David
Bohm : essentially this is a set of practices which support a reflective
and collaborative exploration of individuals' mental models.
The goal of the second day was to work together to further our understanding
of pattern languages. After an initial gathering in which we identified some
ways of proceeding, we broke into small groups. One group categorized the themes
we explored the day before. The other groups went out pattern hunting, and spent
an hour and a half prowling the CHI Conference area looking for patterns. Afterwards,
the groups discussed their findings, and then turned to the business of generating
an interactive poster for the CHI Workshops poster session. Besides describing
the workshop, we decided that we would use the interactive poster as an opportunity
to give other CHI attendees an opportunity to observe, write, and share their
3. Lessons from the Workshop
It's difficult to encapsulate two days of presentations, discussions and activities
in a few pages. In particular, this risks exaggerating the degree of certainty
and consensus that was actually achieved. To partially counter this, quotes
from individual participants are interspersed below. So readers should be warned
that there was a range of viewpoints, and few, if any, of the claims, conjectures,
or cautions we offer were held with complete unanimity.
With these caveats in mind, let's turn to the results of the workshop.
3.1. Perspectives and Interests of Workshop Participants
Not surprisingly, the participants in the workshop represented a diverse range
of views and interests. Here we try to capture some of this diversity:
3.1.1. Two Meanings of "Pattern"
We used "pattern" in two senses:
- Activity Patterns: Patterns that describe things as are they are, without
making a judgment as to whether the pattern is worthy of emulation or preservation.
- Design Patterns: A pattern that describes a connection between a repeatedly
encountered problem and a solution that has been proven in the field, across
time and circumstance.
Naturally, our different uses of "pattern" tended to reflect the
uses we had in mind for patterns.
3.1.2. Many Ways of Using Patterns
Participants were interested in using patterns in many different ways (some
complementary, some contradictory):
- Capture and Description: Patterns can be used to describe the key characteristics
of a place, situation or event, in a context-sensitive way.
- Generalization: Patterns can be used to support generalizing across places
and situations, while retaining an element of concreteness.
- Prescriptive: Patterns (i.e. design patterns) can be used to prescribe solutions
to commonly encountered problems in a particular design domain. Thus, patterns
might be used as a way of presenting HCI guidelines, or guidelines for organizational
- Rhetorical: The concreteness of patterns, and the fact that they are drawn
from the situation for which design is being done, makes them very appropriate
as a lingua franca, a common way of talking about design issues that
is accessible to designers (of whatever disciplinary backgrounds) and the
users and inhabitants of the situation.
- Predictive: Patterns can provide a "what-if" mechanism for reflecting
on the possible impact of changes to a place or situation (by looking at the
patterns a change would directly impact, and by tracing ramifications of such
a change through the network of patterns).
3.1.3. Application Domains
And workshop members were interested in applying patterns to a wide variety
- Embodying HCI Guidelines as patterns
- Using patterns for process and organization design
- Exploring how Alexandrian patterns (as documented in A Pattern Language)
might be applied to new situations (e.g., cyberspace)
- Establishing pattern-making as an organizational practice
- Using patterns to clearly and succinctly describe particular workplaces,
in order to understand possible impacts of new technologies
- Using patterns as a tool in participatory design.
3.2. Some CHI Conference Patterns
In this section, we describe some of the patterns we observed at the CHI Conference.
Most of these arose from our workshop session, although a few patterns that
came from the poster are included. Since the workshop was held before the conference,
the patterns tend to be associated with the CHI Registration area, which is
where most activity was happening.
All of the patterns here are necessarily "activity patterns" - that
is, these patterns are simply what we observed and reported. They may or may
not be "design patterns", that is, proven solutions that should be
emulated in the future, and in other contexts. Given that the organization of
the CHI Conference reflects years of trial and error and optimization of solutions,
it is likely that some of the patterns are design patterns - we just
don't know enough, based on our brief investigation of a single context, to
say which are and which aren't.
3.2.1. Administrative Nexus in the Eddy
Problem Context: The conference management office is the heart of the conference.
It is the location from which the conference is run, where the key personnel
can most often be found, and the center from which crises are likely to be resolved.
It is important to select a good location for the conference management office.
Forces: The conference office should be located near the loci of most frequent
(or severe?) problems. It should also be easy to mobilize student volunteers,
and other resources, from the management office in the event of crises. At the
same time, the management center should not be so prominent that it attracts
people with casual requests, drop-in visitors, or other non-crucial interruptions.
Solution: Locate the conference office near - but not too near - the conference
Comments: This pattern was based on observing the location of the CHI Conference
Management office, and the activities which occured there. the office was located
near the reception area, but far enough away to not be noticed by those who
were not looking for it. There were lots of student volunteers nearby in the
registration area, and we thought it likely that the registration area was a
source (or at least attractor) of problems.
3.2.2. Divide and Conquer Queue
Problem Context: Lots of people arrive to register at once, often not long
before an event.
Forces: Many people are frustrated by standing in long lines, and are particularly
impatient if an event is about to begin. At the same time, people don't like
to see others who arrive after them, being served before them.
Solution: Given that there are plenty of student volunteers, and ample space,
divide the registration queue into smaller units according to well-defined organizational
principles (e.g. alphabetical order). If a particular line is markedly slower
than the other, the dividing algorithm can be tuned by expanding/contracting
the alphabetic slots.
Comments. A particularly nice aspect of this instance of the pattern is that
the registration packets are organized by the same (alphabetic) principle as
the lines, and so the packets can be spatially divided (and re-divided) to match
the composition of the queues.
3.2.3. Clarification Graffiti
Problem Context: Designers try to anticipate interaction patterns and add cues
ahead of time to facilitate interaction. However, since the perspective of the
users in use is different from that of the designer, the cues are never sufficient.
Forces: Signage (and other cues) should be consistent to signal their relevance
to the user, and to be aesthetically pleasing. Of course, this requires that
signs are built ahead of time, outside of the context of use, and thus guarantee
Solution: Allow users to add annotations to pre-designed cues.
Comments: This pattern was based on the observation of a preprinted sign, near
the elevator, that said "Message Board on Ballroom Level." Below it,
someone had taped a handwritten note that said "(Go up one floor)".
Evidently, the sign designer was more familiar with the hotel and its named
spaces than many of the conference attendees. (This pattern is further discussed
in the section "Values and Pattern-Making").
3.3. Observations and Conjectures about Patterns
3.3.1. A Continuum of Patterns
There is a continuum of patterns relevant to HCI from very high to very low
level. Some of us had initially imagined workplace pattern languages, organizational
pattern languages, and user interface pattern languages as very different things.
However, by the end of the workshop it seemed difficult (and inadvisable) to
distinguish among them. At the same time, we did feel a need for structuring
the continuum, and did feel that there were differences between patterns at
various levels. One conjecture was that the higher level patterns are more robust
over time, whereas lower level patterns will change more quickly, in synchrony
with technological evolution.
I now see a continuum from patterns for learning organizations down to patterns
for laying out dialogs. I feel like I better understand the relationships
and the dependencies between them.
[Is there] a need for a broader classification schema derived from the multitudes
of patterns that exist? During the two days we talked about organizational
patterns, software patterns, interface patterns, [and many other types of
patterns]... I expect that each one of these groups can be broken down - how
can we merge or span different pattern languages? (I think that there might
be an analogy here between the variety of architecture description languages
that exist within the software architecture field, and the attempts now to
find languages that span languages...)
3.3.2. The Centrality of Values
Values tend to be expressed explicitly in patterns. An interesting commonality
we discovered is that virtually everyone agreed that values were a central part
of design. Someone said, 'design is not about truth, but about values.' We speculated
about the degree to which this assumption was shared by interaction and software
designers in general. Most of us believed that we were in the minority, and
that pattern languages - by virtue of their explicit representation of values
- attract designers who think in terms of values. On the other hand, it may
be that a concern with values is more widespread than we thought, but that this
concern is masked by the academic orientation of CHI, and the domination of
the rhetoric of usability.
The extent to which patterns (at least design patterns) are driven by goals
which are in turn determined by valued results was something I had not quite
thought of that way before. It probably explains Alexander's outsider status
in architecture, since his values do not seem to match the needs of large
3.3.3. Patterns and Time
Many interaction patterns have a strong temporal component, as well as a geometric
component. But we don't understand, very well, how to go about capturing this.
As I reflect on the interaction patterns we wrote and some of the discussions
I realize that time is a critical factor in interaction (how long does it
take for some of these patterns to unfold) and yet something that's very hard
to express in patterns.
3.4. Pattern Making and the Quality of Patterns
3.4.1. The Experience of Pattern-Making
We found that pattern-making was an engaging and enjoyable experience. The
patterns often seemed beautiful, evocative, and gave us insights into the a
situation that we would have otherwise lacked (e.g. making us aware of connections
between seemingly unconnected aspects of a situation). We felt that reading
and discussing patterns, and especially pattern-making was, for us as designers,
a valuable way of immersing ourselves in a situation. (At the same time, we
had reservations about the validity and quality of our patterns.)
The interaction patterns that emerged on the poster board had a certain beauty
to them. The experience of looking at them evoked a 'that's really true' feeling
of recognition. This points, I think, to the usefulness of this kind of work.
I think that just the way one is able to easily experience the feelings of
the situations [the patterns] depict is valuable. If we could move IT development
closer to this -- that is, getting users to really work at imagining how they
would feel with the system being designed -- we would be a long way ahead.
Patterns are especially useful and desirable because they tend to lead to
a much more holistic and ecological thought processes and outcomes. A human-centered
idea of the big picture is sorely needed in information systems design.
3.4.2. The Difficulty of Pattern-Making
It is easy and fun to begin seeing and making Patterns - but it is difficult
to make good ones. A number of participants were interested in methods of making
and validating patterns.
I also came away with a better appreciation of how easy it is to write patterns
and how hard it is to write ones that capture deep insights into design.
I was ambivalent about the patterns we developed. On the one hand, some of
the descriptions were very evocative, and sensitized me to aspects of the
environment that I ordinarily would have been blind to (as did the process
of looking for patterns). I liked the feeling of recognition that some of
the patterns evoked. On the other hand, I wasn't usually satisfied with either
the analysis of forces underlying patterns, or the cases where solutions were
I'm also concerned about the methods that are used to gather patterns. I
can think of ways to generate patterns using qualitative methods, but how
about quantitatively generated patterns...
I'm not sure (in general) how to "know" when one pattern is "correct"
except in the context of the whole language.
3.4.3. The Difficulty of Pattern-Language-Making
Another issue that was raised, though not experienced in the short time frame
of the workshop, was how to go about building an entire pattern language. It
took Alexander and many colleagues a decade to develop a pattern language for
architecture; interaction design is a much broader domain, and the technologies
that are its substrate are changing with great rapidity.
Making a series of inter-related patterns comprising a pattern language looks
like a difficult problem in "global optimization" -- that is, it
isn't clear to me HOW abstract to make patterns in order to end up with something
that is tractable yet evocative.
3.4.4. Values and Pattern-Making
Our exercise in pattern making revealed that formulating patterns was not easy.
Creating a pattern is an exercise in applying values. Consider the case of the
"Clarification Graffiti" pattern produced during the exercise. "Clarification
Graffiti" embodies the observation that users often add information to
official signs. Thus, a vending machine may have a hand-written note saying
that it eats quarters, or a ticket window may have a handwritten "sold
out for the 8pm show" note, or a copier may have a post-it warning about
the use of transparencies.
"Clarification Graffiti" suggests that this pattern of behavior is
good and useful; that is, it is a design pattern, a prescription to which systems
designers should adhere. But, there are two other formulations as well:
- It doesn't matter what designers do. Users WILL provide "Clarification
Graffiti" somehow. Therefore, it isn't really a design pattern that "good
HCI" needs to support - it's just a descriptive pattern that captures
something common about human behavior.
- "Clarification Graffiti" is not a 'feature' that should be supported;
rather, it is a symptom of something gone wrong - namely, that the designers
did not sufficiently test the system with real users in real contexts before
instantiating the design. Thus, "Clarification Graffiti" is really
an anti-pattern: it encourages a short-term symptomatic fix when what is really
needed is a long-term change in the process by which systems are designed
How do we choose amongst these formulations? Use my intuitions? Yours? Is there
a method which could be employed? Would such a method be applicable just to
"Clarification Graffiti", or would it require that the entire pattern
language be evaluated? Is evaluation really even the issue here? It seems as
though these alternate takes on "Clarification Graffiti" are entwined
with values, politics, realities of practice, and other highly situational,
subjective issues. Perhaps the value of patterns here is not that it provides
a way of choosing the 'right' reading, but rather that it raises these issues
and can make them a subject for discussion among the stakeholders and users
of the to-be-designed system.
3.4.5. Pattern Making as a Collective Activity
Building a Pattern Language for HCI needs to be a wide-spread collaboration.
This is also necessary for them to reach their potential as a lingua franca.
The workshop has left me feeling one thing very forcefully in connection
with this: HCI patterns (perhaps patterns at all) cannot (should not?) be
the work of a single person.
4. Concluding Remarks
Probably the point of greatest agreement among members of the workshop is that
we felt that we were at the very beginning of the enterprise of understanding
the role and utility of pattern languages for interaction design. Collectively,
it is probably fair to say that we are all intrigued by the promise of pattern
languages, while, at the same time, a bit wary of expecting too much from what
we expect to be just another tool in the interaction designer's repertoire.
Those interested in a greater understanding of patterns and pattern languages
should look over the bibliography. For information on the web (and in particular,
for information related to software patterns) a good starting point is the Patterns
Home Page: http://st-www.cs.uiuc.edu/users/patterns/.
The Patterns Home Page includes URLs, pointers to mailing lists, and a bibliography.
A good beginning for aspiring pattern writers is John
Vlissides' essay on pattern making , which, though written for the software
patterns community, is very useful for those grappling with interaction patterns.
1. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King,
I.,& Angel, S., A Pattern Language. New York: Oxford University Press,
2. Alexander, C., Timeless Way of Building. New York: Oxford University
3. Bohm, D. On Dialogue. London: Routledge, 1996.
4. Coplien, J. O., and Schmidt, D. C. (eds.) Pattern Languages of Program
Design. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1995.
5. Gabriel, R. P. Patterns of Software: Tales from the Software Community.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
6. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., and Vlissides, J. Design Patterns:
Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley,
7. Vlissides, J. Pattern Hatching: Seven Habits of Successful Pattern Writers.
C++ Report, November/December 1996 http://st-www.cs.uiuc.edu/users/patterns/papers/7habits.html
6. A Bibliography of Patterns-Related Material
Here's a list (with occasional annotations) of papers, magazines, and books
that were recommended (in various contexts) during the course of the workshop.
6.1. Books by Christopher Alexander and his Colleagues
Here is the current corpus of Alexander's books on patterns. His next work,
a three volume set, collectively titled The Nature of Order, is expected
"shortly" from Oxford University Press.
- Alexander, C., Notes On the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1964.
- Alexander's first book, in which he lays out the basic concept
of patterns (which he refers to as diagrams).
Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksdahl-King,
I.,& Angel, S., A Pattern Language. New York: Oxford University Press,
Alexander, C., The Timeless Way of Building. New York: Oxford University
Alexander, C., The Linz Cafe. New York: Oxford University Press: 1982.
Alexander, C., The Production of Houses. New York: Oxford University
Alexander, C., Neis, H., Anninous, A., King, I., A New Theory of Urban Design.
New York: Oxford University Press: 1987.
Alexander, C., The Oregon Experiment. New York: Oxford University Press:
Alexander, C. Manifesto 1991. Progressive Architecture, July, 1991.
- Alexander, C., A Foreshadowing of 21st Century Art : The Color and Geometry
of Very Early Turkish Carpets . New York: Oxford University Press: 1993.
- Generally known as "the rug book"; in it, Alexander
tries to analyze what makes early Turkish carpets especially beautiful.
Alexander, C., Black, G., Tsutsui, M.O., Tsutsui, M. The Mary Rose Museum.
New York: Oxford University Press: 1995.
6.2 On Applications of Pattern Languages in Architecture
These papers describe applications of pattern languages to particular projects;
they range from descriptive and enthusiastic to more critical and reflective
Canine, C & Frankel, G. E. Building By the Book: Using "A Pattern
Language" to design a house with heart. Harrowsmith, vol. 3, March
1987. pp. 51-59.
Carpenter, P. Pattern Planning. Building Ideas, vol. 5, Summer, 1987.
- Coates, G. J. & Seamon, D. Promoting a Foundational Ecology Practically
Through Christopher Alexander's Pattern Language: The Example of Meadowcreek.
In Dwelling, Seeing, and Designing, (ed. David Seamon). State University
of New York Press: 1993. pp 331-354.
- One of the more detailed accounts of applying the pattern
language approach to a particular site.
Davis, H. Individual Houses in Groups: The Pattern Language in a Teaching Studio.
Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 36, 1982. pp. 14-19.
Fallon, R. and Eddington, D. Working With a "A Pattern Language."
Fine Homebuilding. December 1986/January 1987. pp 51-55.
- Fromm, D. & Bosselmann, P. Mexicali Revisted: Seven Years Later. Places,
vol. 1, no. 4, 1983-84. pp 78-90.
- Alexander and his students spent time in Mexicali designing
housing using a pattern language. This paper, by one of the students, recounts
a visit to the houseing project seven years later, and reflects on what happened,
and ways in which the project failed to achieve its goals, though not without
some small successes as well.
- Hester, R. Sacred Structures and Everyday Life: A Return to Manteo, North
Carolina. In Dwelling, Seeing, and Designing, (ed. David Seamon). State
University of New York Press: 1993. pp. 271-297.
- Not about use of an Alexandrean pattern language, per se,
but about the creation of a pattern language-like representation which came
to serve as a common language in a participatory design process.
Mulfinger, D. Putting "A Pattern Language" to Work. Fine Homebuilding,
Spring, 1987. pp. 49-53.
6.3 . Other Readings in Architecture and Urban Design
While these references are not about the pattern language approach, per
se, their approaches to architectural and urban design are in much the same
Bacon, E. N. Design of Cities. New York: Penguin Books, 1967.
- Banerjee, T. and Southworth, M. City Sense and City Design: Writings
and Projects of Kevin Lynch. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1990.
- The work of Kevin Lynch is well worth a look by anyone interested
in a holistic, experiential approach to urban design. This book is a collection
of writings spanning his career; also of interest is the seminal, Image
of the City (1960), as well as What Time is this Place (1972),
and Good City Form (1981), all from MIT Press.
Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S., & Smith, G. Responsive
Environments. London: The Architectural Press, 1985.
Brand, S. How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They're Built. New
York, NY: Penguin Books Inc., 1994.
Cuff, D. Architecture: The Story of Practice. MIT Press. 1991
Garreau, J. Edge City. New York, NY: Anchor Books Inc., 1991
Gehl, Jan. Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold, 1980/1987.
- Jacobs, J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York:
Random House, 1961.
- Arguably one of the century's most significant and influential
books on urban design.
- Seamon, D. (editor). Environmental
and Architectural Phenomenology Newsletter. Kansas State.
- A small circulation, quarterly newsletter on phenomenological
approaches to architecture and urban design. (Subscription: $10 ($12 non-USA)/year
payable to David Seamon/EAP, at David Seamon; Architecture Dept.; 211 Seaton
Hall, Kansas State University; Manhattan, KS 66506. 913-532-5953.) Also see
Seamon, D. (editor) Dwelling, Seeing, Designing : Toward a Phenomenological
Ecology. (SUNY Series in Environmental and Architectural Phenomenology).
State Univ of New York: February, 1993.
- Whyte, W.H. City: Return to the Center. New York: Anchor Books, 1988.
- A sociologist reports on a sixteen year study of social behavior
in urban spaces.
6.4. Patterns for Software and Information Systems
Coplien, J. O. Patterns. SIGS Books, 1996.
Coplien, J. O., and Schmidt, D. C. (eds.) Pattern Languages of Program Design.
Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1995.
Curtis, B., Krasner, H., & Iscoe, N. A Field Study of the Software
Design Process for Large Systems. Communications of the ACM 1988;31(11):1268-1287.
- Gabriel, R. P. Patterns of Software: Tales from the Software Community.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
- This book touches on some of the overlaps between Alexandrian
pattern languages, and patterns as they apply to software design.
- Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., and Vlissides, J. Design Patterns:
Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley,
- Often referred to, in the software patterns community, as
the "Gang of Four book."
Lea, D. Concurrent Programming in Java: Design Principles and Patterns.
Markus M.L., & Keil M. If We Build It, They Will Come: Designing Information
Systems That Users Want To Use. Sloan Management Review, Summer 1993.
Schmidt, D., Fayad, M., & Johnson, R. (eds.). Special Section on Software
Patterns. Communications of the ACM, vol. 39, no. 10, October 1996. pp.
Vlissides, J. Pattern Hatching: Seven Habits of Successful Pattern Writers.
C++ Report, Novermber/December 1996. http://st-www.cs.uiuc.edu/users/patterns/papers/7habits.html
Vlissides, J. Patterns: The Top Ten Misconceptions. http://www.sigs.com/publications/docs/objm/9703/9703.vlissides.html
6.5. Organization Design
Collins, J.C., & Porras, J.I. Built to Last : Successful Habits
of Visionary Companies. Harper-Collins 1997.
Senge, P. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of a Learning Organization.
The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a
Learning Organization. Peter M. Senge, Charlotte Roberts, Richard B.
Ross (eds.) Doubleday: 1994.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss A.L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies
for Qualitative Research. Hawthorne, N. Y.: Aldine de Gruyter, 1967.
Zuboff, S. In The Age of The Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power.
New York, NY: Basic Books Inc., 1988.
7. The Workshop Organizers
Thomas Erickson is an interaction designer at IBM's T.J. Watson Labs (he was
at Apple Research at the time of the workshop). His current research interests
include social interaction over the internet, digital genres, personal information
systems, and interaction design theory and practice. He can be contacted at
firstname.lastname@example.org, and browsed at http://www.pliant.org/
John Thomas is an Executive Director for Bell Atlantic Science and Technology
with responsibilities for speech technology, applications, and platforms as
well as human computer interaction. He has published numerous articles in such
areas as speech technology, query languages, human problem solving and creativity,
and human computer interaction. Currently, he is focusing his own work on Organizational
Learning. He can be contacted at email@example.com and browsed at http://www.truthtable.com.