The distinction between designer and developer should never have existed in the first place.

A designer who can’t code well isn’t a good designer. A coder who can’t design well isn’t a good coder.

The are inseparable and intertwined aspects of the creative process. The same strengths apply to both : the understanding of form, of structure, and simplicity. How to build and connect things in such a way that is self-evident, elegant, simple.

Zuckerberg designed *and* wrote Facebook when he launched. Parker designed *and* wrote Napster.

I know this is flame bait, and people will be quick to produce analogies about architects, carpenters and plumbers.

It’s the wrong analogy. It’s more like writing a book. Sure, a ‘designer’ can give an outline with some characters to some hack-writer who makes a book out of it. I bet a lot of books actually get written that way. But not good ones.

A good author sees the whole arc of the story, develops the characters by hammering out lines of dialog, scenes, chapters. He will *make changes* as he goes, informed by the experience of this hammering. Some of the initial design may have to change. A character may have to be dropped – there are blank spots that get filled in – these decisions get made almost automatically by a good writer as he gets to feel how his design plays out, line by line.

The real ‘plumbing’ is done by the tools and languages employed; they hide non-essential details.
The rest is inseparable. Separate it, and you’re creating Paint-By-Numbers art. Efficient, sure. Important – never.

I do think a designer should have basic coding knowledge, so he/she can have an overall idea of what’s going on though.

Technologies, languages and standards are constantly evolving, and, as a designer, I found myself pretty overwhelmed trying to keep up with everything. I think it’s more important developing and having a solid foundation in Design, UI, UX, than knowing the last CSS standard on the market.

It’s been two years now since I’ve chosen not to code anymore, and I found myself liberated, in a sense where I don’t have to worry about the technical stuff of a design implementation, I can always stay focused on the innovative (yet doable) side of the story, and let the coder come up with an optimized, well-written and last CSS-X version available that best fit the job.

If you are able to creatively decorate a space for human use but are not capable of creating functional schematics, you are not an architect. You are an interior designer. This can be a demanding job and does require a certain amount of talent and creativity, but don’t try to call yourself an architect. Anyone with a good eye for color and form can be an interior designer. Only people who have a good eye for color and form AND also an understanding on a technical level of the properties of materials as well as how people will use the space and flow from one room to another get to call themselves architects.

Sorry. Am I getting a little “out there”? LOL.

Very topical reading this as I have recently had an interview with a (well established) ad / communications agency wishing to bring their digital requirements in house. The thing that struck me was they seem to be expecting whoever goes into the role to cover all aspects of the build. I just don’t think this is a reasonable expectation anymore, if it ever was.

Sure, I *can* code xhtml / css from a psd or whatever; but (as you point out) a psd / graphic when translated to code by anyone but the designer maybe not what was in the designers minds eye and it’s almost certainly going to deviate. Anyone Designing for the web *needs* and absolutely *must* have a thorough understanding of the ‘environmental’ constraints of the browser too, and I think that only comes from writing client side code (akin to print designers understanding ‘the fold’). I would even extend that to also cover a thorough understanding of accessibility issues / techniques.

At the end of the day, for me it’s this: If you want to provide a quality service to your clients then these boundaries must be defined. I simply find it a little naive that anyone would think otherwise – gone, thankfully, are the days of the ‘webmaster’. My job is to ensure all the back-end interactions are handled in a secure and robust manner; the designers is to ensure all the front end aspects are taken care of. Two highly skilled disciplines in their own right.

Now, I have been asked back for a second interview to speak with the creative guys. How do I get this across in a subtle not in-your-face way without alienating myself (the position does actually sound really nice)???

This is especially true when the designs are going to be handed off to a completely different agency to implement. Food for thought!

The all in guy.

I’m kinda bad at reading textbooks, and I was still trying to get through this book when I started out revamping my company’s website. I basically learned how to implement CSS and XHTML practices within 2 weeks using only Google, and looking at other people’s websites. I now feel pretty comfortable playing with the CSS, and have shifted completely away from tables-only layouts.

I’m still reading this book, but now I feel like I know more than what the book covers…

So if you really are keen on making that transition to coding, I say do the work and hit the ground running. Make a website as you’re learning. You honestly don’t need a book to get started. There are plenty of resources online, and not to mention you can also look for more RECENT sources so that you are up to date with current practices.

What do you think about the requirements to a good webdesigner when it comes to sketching out interaction?

An ideal webdesigner would be well-founded in “classic” graphic design theory and history, know what works on the web while being able to push the limits, know enough interaction design to be able to take this role as well as being able to mock-up a site in XHTML (at least for standards-compliant browsers)? Or how do you feel – especially about the interaction design role?

In my company, roles are quite divided between dedicated designers, interaction designers and front-end developers – and that’s only for the GUI-part ; )

1. Wireframe in hotgloo.com (keeps me from going too much into the details while getting the user interface right). Collaboration on the designs and commenting rounds it up…

2. When I am satisfied, I code the basic html and css. with all elements but no polishing (like css 3 and all the little details). Now I have a fully functional site and I already have a feeling on how to craft out with colors and all.

3. I move to Illustrator and open an exported pdf from hotgloo.com and work out details as I code the detailed css, page by page.

4. Only now I integrate jquery as my library of choice…

Job done (back to 1.)

;-)

I won’t admit how old I am, or how long I’ve been a “graphic” designer, but I’ve been debating getting update training, or hanging it up for good. Truth is, Mike is right. Us oldsters need to give in, or get out. Learn to code!

I might sketch on paper with lines all over the place, but after that, I’m pretty much writing code. I find it’s easier and less time-consuming to make changes. It also combines looks and functionality so that clients have a better sense of how their website will work rather than have static images.

So a web designer who can’t code isn’t really a designer to me.