Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
37 Signal’s Getting Real convinced me that wireframing and writing functional specification documents are middleman steps unnecessary for building web applications and dynamic websites.
Is the overhead for these steps worth its weight? Is prototyping in HTML/CSS or even PhotoShop documents (so designers can work on them directly) a better option than using software like Visio? Personally, I am swaying towards the latter but am not sure.
‘Fail to plan is plan to fail’ – or something like that.
Wireframing is not limited to web-apps; it is pervasively used wherever a high-level overview of any system is needed (it’s just called something else).
Functional specs, when you know what is to be done & how to do it would indeed be overkill. A high-level diagram of your intentions would suffice. And it will never be unnecessary. It primarily helps you focus on the scope and intent/target of what you want to do.
The focus should be on preventing wasted effort – finding out half-way through that something essential, that impacts on all other objects, are missing is not what you want to discover. Wireframing in this case would assist in detecting most major functional needs. You would only need to elaborate on functional spec where absolutely needed. Using Photoshop to design your will also be ‘wasted effort’ – far better to use evolutionary prototyping (RAD technique) with CSS/HTML – but still do pen & paper mock-up of your intentions.