<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wireframe fidelity – Why does it matter?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wireframes-usability.com/2010/05/18/wireframe-fidelity-%E2%80%93-why-does-it-matter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wireframes-usability.com/2010/05/18/wireframe-fidelity-%e2%80%93-why-does-it-matter/</link>
	<description>a blog on prototyping by pidoco°</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 04:34:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: RMD</title>
		<link>http://wireframes-usability.com/2010/05/18/wireframe-fidelity-%e2%80%93-why-does-it-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-3879</link>
		<dc:creator>RMD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:48:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wireframes-usability.com/?p=1201#comment-3879</guid>
		<description>I used to work in low fidelity wireframes but I feel that if a website or application already has a robust style guide that can be broken down into assets , e.g. assets for buttons font styles etc, then these assets can be used to create the wirefarme just as quickly as using sketchy style assets commonly used in low fidelity prototypes. So long as people revieiwng the high fidelity prototype are aware that it is a prototpe they are looking at and is easy to change and little cost, then you end u with a prototype of a high enough fidelity to enable good user feedback from any usability tests that may be conducted with end users who do not need to appreciate the abstraction of low fidelity prototypes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to work in low fidelity wireframes but I feel that if a website or application already has a robust style guide that can be broken down into assets , e.g. assets for buttons font styles etc, then these assets can be used to create the wirefarme just as quickly as using sketchy style assets commonly used in low fidelity prototypes. So long as people revieiwng the high fidelity prototype are aware that it is a prototpe they are looking at and is easy to change and little cost, then you end u with a prototype of a high enough fidelity to enable good user feedback from any usability tests that may be conducted with end users who do not need to appreciate the abstraction of low fidelity prototypes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian</title>
		<link>http://wireframes-usability.com/2010/05/18/wireframe-fidelity-%e2%80%93-why-does-it-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-2492</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 12:26:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wireframes-usability.com/?p=1201#comment-2492</guid>
		<description>I prefer low fidelity wireframes, because even high fidelity wireframes are a poor substitute compared to &quot;real&quot; layouts from a specialized graphic designer. A wireframe that is close to a elaborate design proposal will likely lead to futile discussions with the client about the graphical aspects when the topic should rather be structure and ui principles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I prefer low fidelity wireframes, because even high fidelity wireframes are a poor substitute compared to &#8220;real&#8221; layouts from a specialized graphic designer. A wireframe that is close to a elaborate design proposal will likely lead to futile discussions with the client about the graphical aspects when the topic should rather be structure and ui principles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

