Student or Learner
Can you deliver an artifact's usage meaning by its form and materials? For example, if you shape a door knob 's left end by an arrow, it may mean turn left to open. Does the underlined mean what I just explained?
I mean, the sentence is saying the form and materials can be made to mean the usage of an artifact, but it's harder than than surface symbols. Right?
ex) Sheets of paper exist almost entirely for the purpose of carrying information, so we tend to think of them as neutral objects. We rarely interpret marks on paper as references to the paper itself. However, when we see the text, characters, and images on artifacts that serve other purposes, we generally interpret these marks as labels that do refer to their carriers. Natural objects do not come with labels, of course, but these days, most physical artifacts do. That is, their designers have chosen to shift part of the burden of communication from the form and materials of the artifact itself to lightweight surface symbols. So, for example, a designer of door handles might not worry about communicating their functions through their shapes, but might simply mark them ‘push’ and ‘pull.’
No, that's what I meant as you did. I was just asking if it is also possible to deliver the usage by its shape or material even though it's more inconvenient that lables. Shapes are a good way, but how can materials do that? If the coffee cup's material is wooden or plastic, does it make any difference?
Last edited by keannu; 09-Jun-2011 at 07:21.