it is not clear how to select representative buildings and second,
how to recognize the relevant differences and their disadvantages.
The same holds true for architects.
The are often committed to their own experiences and specialist literature.
With regard to the foundation of user requirements in particular the literature of the behavioral and management sciences may be useful.
However, as Weidemann and Anderson have pointed out, many designers find this research literature difficult to use,
because design implications are 'buried' in jargon-filled text or seem to be totally missing. Besides, architects are mush more oriented yo visual representation rather than verbal notes.
This may lead to the so-called applicability gap. To bridge the gab we need well elaborated design guides, based on research and focussed on
it is not clear how to select representative buildings and second, how to recognize the relevant differences and their disadvantages.The same holds true for architects.The are often committed to their own experiences and specialist literature.With regard to the foundation of user requirements in particular the literature of the behavioral and management sciences may be useful.However, as Weidemann and Anderson have pointed out, many designers find this research literature difficult to use,because design implications are 'buried' in jargon-filled text or seem to be totally missing. Besides, architects are mush more oriented yo visual representation rather than verbal notes.This may lead to the so-called applicability gap. To bridge the gab we need well elaborated design guides, based on research and focussed on
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..