This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
the_relation_between_design_patterns_and_schema_theory [2013/09/21 09:59] yann |
the_relation_between_design_patterns_and_schema_theory [2013/09/21 10:11] yann |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Of course, with respect to design patterns, the point of the paper is that design patterns (in a designer's mind) are similar to schema and that the forms of documented patterns help designers learn and assimilate/accommodate new schema: "A design pattern, too, is a logical structure that consists of variables" and "[it] is attempt to discover some invariant features, which distinguishes good places from bad places with respect to some particular [constrained]". The paper describes how these patterns can be activated in memory, possibly with some measure of likelihood when competing/conflicting patterns exist. However, the paper does not say anything about the "cost" of computing a likelihood for all patterns in memory. We could assume some kind of hierarchical bottom-up activation, as hinted in the paper about "visual patterns", and further discussed in [[http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~plab/book.html|Palmer's book]] (which we have in the lab. library!). Moreover, it recalls that Rumelhart and Norman state that "the selection [...] of schema [...] is called comprehension", what **about program comprehension**? | Of course, with respect to design patterns, the point of the paper is that design patterns (in a designer's mind) are similar to schema and that the forms of documented patterns help designers learn and assimilate/accommodate new schema: "A design pattern, too, is a logical structure that consists of variables" and "[it] is attempt to discover some invariant features, which distinguishes good places from bad places with respect to some particular [constrained]". The paper describes how these patterns can be activated in memory, possibly with some measure of likelihood when competing/conflicting patterns exist. However, the paper does not say anything about the "cost" of computing a likelihood for all patterns in memory. We could assume some kind of hierarchical bottom-up activation, as hinted in the paper about "visual patterns", and further discussed in [[http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~plab/book.html|Palmer's book]] (which we have in the lab. library!). Moreover, it recalls that Rumelhart and Norman state that "the selection [...] of schema [...] is called comprehension", what **about program comprehension**? | ||
+ | |||
+ | The paper makes other interesting points, including that "[e]xperts usually have a better understanding of a given problem in their domain in that they can represent problem based on its second order features rather than its first order feature", that "our perception oft [design problem] depends on our previous experience and what we expect about [the design]" (which is typically express when an expert says "Actually, the real problem is...", and that "typical [designs] are retrieved by [designers] in term of general information rather than the specific information [but that] for extraordinary situations, [designers] often remember the specific details", (which highlights the interest of reading patterns, code). Yet, it recalls that "schema [are] never fully [whole] because after thousands of hours of practice, [designer] can still improve his or her performance." | ||
+ | |||
+ | Finally, the paper concludes |