Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (8)
Mehr von egoodman
Mehr von egoodman (11)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Beyond Handwaving: The Role of Performance in Interaction Design
- 1. BEYOND HANDWAVING THE ROLE OF PERFORMANCE IN INTERACTION DESIGN ELIZABETH GOODMAN www.confectious.net @egoodman The genesis of this talk lies in a quick encounter I had with a friend of mine, a designer whom I shadowed as part of my dissertation research. Let's call him Rene. Rene told me that he wasn’t working on wireframes anymore -- what he called doing the “real work” on the project. Instead, he was “handwaving” with clients. And I took it for granted at the time. But later on, re-reading my field notes, I thought -- wait, Rene is spending a lot of his time preparing for and then conducting these meetings. He’s a senior designer. This is part of his job. Why ISN’T handwaving "real work"? What is handwaving? what is "the real work" anyway? Rene was expressing a sentiment that’s pretty common in both practitioner and academic circles What I heard often was that the “real work” of design is ideation and drawing -- and that relationship management and communication are less central to what it means to be a designer. This talk will argue that performance is, indeed, “real work.”
- 2. ABOUT THE STUDY Project observation at three interaction design consultancies Interviews with individual designers Conference-going and directed reading Download the dissertation at Download the dissertation at http://www.confectious.net/design-practice-ethnography/ WHAT I DID I started thinking about interaction design and performance as part of my dissertation work at UC Berkeley's School of Information. I had two motivations 1) Reading a lot of design theory and felt like a lot of the work I did and that I saw my friends doing wasn't being accounted for. Specifically, the emphasis on *creativity* and *thinking*. Every designer I knew was a fountain of ideas. But some were clearly more successful than others at getting those ideas built and into the world. I wanted to figure out why. 2) Also, I wanted to improve my own practice. So I spent about a year, off-and-on, hanging out with designers whose work I respected to try and figure out what made them so good at what they did. I met other designers individually And I went to conferences like this one and took lots of notes about how speakers TALKED ABOUT what they did I also read a lot of how-to books Notes, photos, videos. I counted Post-it notes (no, really). Lots of video analysis. But it took me a long time to see performance happening at all. Because it's so pervasive, I took it for granted. Just like my designer friend.
- 3. DEFINING PERFORMANCE Boundedness Narrative Audiences Schechner, R. (2013). Performance Studies: An Introduction. Routledge. The definition of "performance" I use draws from classic literature in the field of Performance Studies: (1) Performances are bounded episodes. They have a beginning, a middle, and an end (2) Performances require an audience as well as a performer – the audience – even only imagined -- is necessary to the definition. (3) Performances are narrative. They tell stories.
- 4. PERFORMANCE IS ORDINARY AS ILLUSTRATED BY A VIDEO NOT SHOWN HERE Here’s what performance looks like in everyday interaction design work. I’m showing this particular snippet because it’s both ordinary and extraordinary. It’s ordinary in that this is a very mundane meeting about a very routine project in a genre – an ipad- compatible shopping website – that is particularly standardized. Yet it’s extraordinary because it illustrates the fluency of expert embodied skill. Lets watch it. The designers are looking at an array of conceptual sketches at the beginning of the proejct. Alan, the male designer has misunderstood what Audrey, the female designer, intends with a sketch. He reads the sketch as including a dropdown that reveals pictures of what’s for sale. Audrey explains what she really meant – not a dropdown but a skinny bar that gets bigger and smaller. This distinction turns less on a technical difference than on an aesthetic, affective “feel” that for Audrey differentiates the dropdown from the bar. This is a classic performance episode. It’s a bounded event – this meeting is going to begin and end. It involves witnesses – Alan and Audrey are talking in front of a more senior interaction designer and visual designer. They need the senior designers to agree on what to do next. And it involves storytelling – in this case, what the website is going to do when a user taps or clicks on a link. It’s not Hamlet, but it’s a good example of the kind of stories that businesses depends upon. It illustrates the difficulty of collaboration. There is no system. Just these black and white, static drawings. There are no users. Just Audrey and the team. They are trying to make some decisions about the navigation directions. They have to make a decision on the basis of their own guesses about how future users will perceive the system described in the drawings when it’s implemented. Audry and Alan know each other well and are both very skilled, but they can still misunderstand even a seemingly very clear schematic. That’s why Audrey has to start gesturing.
- 5. YOU HAVE TO PERFORM THE PROJECT TO MAKE THE PRODUCT Careful staging + Skillful roleplay Authoritative witnessing let's get down to the nitty gritty: what did I learn during my fieldwork? and what does this mean today? I began to think of product as being *performed* into being Careful staging + Skillful role-play = Authoritative witnessing
- 6. CAREFUL STAGING ------ CAREFUL STAGING Producing an audience (it's a production problem of coordination and technology) Assembling the right people holding it together with a patchwork of technologies …this seems like it’s not design, but it is Forum of collaboration [pic of famous MIT physics building][whiteboard] We have not yet found a substitute for the whiteboard! Problems of distributed teams: who sits at the table?
- 7. STAGING ALIGNMENT AT THE WHITEBOARD xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXXXXXX XXXXXXX xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXXXXXX XXXXXXX xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX We see two designers and their client using Post-its, a whiteboard, and stickers to negotiate which features to put in an initial mobile application. No single person can tell the group what features to add first; individual acts of moving the Post-its on the shared board (yellow + concept sketches) add up to a collective decision visible by stepping away and examining the larger picture (green notes). What’s important here is: 1)
- 8. Photo from MIT Museum COLLABORATING IN THE TRADING ZONE Gorman, M. E. (2010). Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise: Creating New Kinds of Collaboration. MIT Press. Photo from MIT Museum Trading zones facilitate collaboration among different disciplines, as in MIT’s Rad Lab, or Radiation Lab. Note the different types of people in both photos They learn “interactional expertise,” or how to speak each other’s language The trading zone is the stable space that facilitates that Glassblowing photo in context: http://web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/243/radlab_POP.html Physics photo in context: http://www.atomicheritage.org/location/cambridge-ma
- 10. ROLEPLAY IN A TYPICAL WALKTHROUGH So you get THAT when you hit that arrow button <touching a black triangle on the first sheet of paper within the shaded box> and <pauses> If you click Eat <taps at a line of text next to the triangle, moving aside the first sheet to reveal more of the wireframe on the paper beneath> just imagine a dotted line here <pincers her fingers on the navigation menu on the second page> you just land on this page <spreads her hands across the second page> and this is the Discovery <circles a finger around the central region on the second page>. SKILLFUL ROLEPLAY role switching: users, designers, clients, technologies CASE STUDY okay, this is going to be a little intense. I’m not expecting you to really read all the small text. I’m just showing it as an example of the kind of analysis it aktes to amek what we take for granted visible as a real skill but this is how you take everyday craft seriously -- you get into the details This is Audra again, walking the team through a set of wireframes she made to work out the navigation (1) An indefinite user As she talks and taps her fingers, Audra is invoking the actions and per- ceptions of “you,” an indefinite but very present prospective user who is not Audra herself (A, B). (2) The web browser The web browser is responsible for replacing one visual region with an- other after the activation of a hyperlink. In moving from the first sheet of paper to the second (B), Audra is enactively simulating how the browser would load a new file. (3) Designer: Finally, Audra plays her own official role, that of a designer in LargeAgency. She departs from the diegetic narration to gesturally mark a non-existent dotted line ( C) and to in- dicate where she has placed a type of content intended to support Homeward Ceramics’s business goals. (4) Implied machines and humans Moreover, Audra’s story also has two unmentioned but impli- cated actors (Clarke & Montini, 1993): the iPads and the iPad users whom she is trying to accom- modate with the rollover- free navigation menu. It’s kind of a virtuoso performance by Audra -- and by her audience, who are all following right along as she switches from role to role. Where -- and who -- is the user? In the body and out. Professional feeling This is what’s often called “bringing empathy” That’s what happens in a design studio The future users aren’t there -- can’t be there, because the thing doesn’t exist yet So the designer instantiates them as a way to
- 11. PROFESSIONAL VISION Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional Vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633. Photo from the Los Angeles Times Link to photo in context: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/06/rodney-king-beating-was-catalytic-moment-for-lapd-attorney- says.html 1994 Charles Goodwin Professional vision teaching non-experts to see and categorize the world like experts he analyzed videotapes of expert witnesses at the Rodney King trial, successfully taught the jury to see the video to see Rodney King’s actions Not like the general public But like the police officers beating him He is teaching them how to see, using the still and a pointer This is a performance What we’re doing with clients is a little similar -- though not to the same end, of course But we want them to FEEL as well as see I want to argue that the empathy doesn’t lie in the persona document It’s in the figure of the designer, like that guy (weirdly, wearing a tux) who is showing the jury what and how to see in the video He’s doing it not just with words But with his entire body
- 12. AUTHORITATIVE WITNESSING This is a fancy academic term for “getting the right stakeholders to agree, and know that they have all agreed” What does that mean in practice?
- 13. CAN I GET AN AUTHORITATIVE WITNESS? Meeting 1: On the phone Meeting 2: In the studio AUTHORITATIVE WITNESSING people watching EACH OTHER agree Granting assent that can’t be revoked In this case, we have two meetings. In the first, the designers are presenting to their client, who is following along on her iPhone because she’s in a car. They’re talking into a conference phone system. She can’t see animations, she can’t do screensharing. It seemed to go well, with her agreeing to a clear direction for a gestural interface. But that seeming agreement ended up causing many problems for the project. - she didn’t fully understand what she was agreeing to and the designers didn’t have any visual or body cues to hint at her incomprehension - some important stakeholders for HER weren’t on the call -- which she hadn’t told anyone so when she decided to withdraw her agreement, claiming she’d never agreed to it and that her customers didn’t like the direction, the project delivery timeline was thrown into turmoil. And, in the end, jeopardized delivery. The project did not end well. At all. The second meeting is the change meeting. The client is in the room, and they’re all looking at the same screen, at the same scale, with the same animations. One designer is physically pointing to what they’re going to change, and how. When we teach design, we often talk about learning how to “see” a problem. What’s going on here is first a problem of staging, and second a problem of “showing.” The designers have to SHOW their client just how much money and time her requested changes are going to cost, and SHOW her the logic of the choices already made, so that they can get her to commit and stay committed.
- 14. Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. (2011). Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton University Press. An Experiment on a Bird in the Air Pump Joseph Wright of Derby, 1768 THEORY Histories of science: you need the right kind of witnesses to declare your demonstration credible [air pump] As with scientists in the early days of experimentation (Shapin & Schaffer, 2011), convinc- ing others and oneself requires a skilled display before an appropriate audience to evoke affect, belief, and witnessed assent. This is one of the most famous “experiments” Notice the various kinds of emotion in the faces of the onlookers They believe in what’s happening to the bird. They are convinced. It’s also important that this is in a private home. It’s an experiment designed to convince not the general public but a select set of witnesses -- the kind of middle and upper classes whose support scientists needed in order to “win” the debates
- 15. WHAT THIS TELLS US ABOUT INTERACTION DESIGN WHAT THIS TELLS US ABOUT INTERACTION DESIGN? Who saw the talk on communicating vision? Great I think these two talks are really good complements Boundaries: these are ritualized activities; we have a structure. Narrative: Helping people see, feel, and believe are central to our job. Witnessing: Stories help us deliver because they limit as well as open up We need to make artifacts to “keep the vision alive” -- the UX roadmaps, the wireframes, the sitemaps But we also need performance to 1) embody that vision and give it life that stakeholders can feel 2) get them to turn that vision into action There's this hope that the deliverables speak for themselves -- that they'll do the delivering. But like a monologue or a magician’s trick, it's all in the delivery. Take pride in running a good meeting. It’s almost better than preparing a good document (D.M. Brown, 2010, p. 22). Successful designers treat the artifacts more like instruments to be played than actors in their own right.
- 16. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WHERE WE GO NEXT I'm not telling you anything you don't know. A bunch of useful concepts that I hope will surface parts of your work that you take for granted. QUESTIONS How should we teach performance? And I don't mean teach public speaking skills or selling. Let's also consider what an emphasis on performance might mean for how we teach students and support working interaction designers. This is an open question for me in the future. Lots of great new prototyping tools. I'm a big fan of Invision, myself. Still need storytelling to make people believe. That walkthrough isn't going to walkthrough itself. Rise of globally distributed teams - I work in a distributed team -- people in Chicago, clients and product manager in DC - working at making forums of collaboration - what comes next after the sticky note?
- 17. READ MORE egoodman@confectious.net @egoodman Download the dissertation at www.confectious.net/design-practice-ethnography TELL ME MORE... I’M WRITING A BOOK www.confectious.net www.delicious.com/oue Doing Design: Interaction Design and Performance Oxford University Press Coming out in 2016
Hinweis der Redaktion
- My name is Liz Goodman, and I recently got my PhD from UC Berkeley’s School of Information. I’m going to be talking about the profession interaction design today – the design of dynamic dialogues among humans and machines. First time talking about this subject since I finished up the dissertation – very excited.
- But first, a little about me! My background is in design research – research for product development, prototyping and design as a way to do R&D for large companies, and research on design practice. I have a master’s degree in interaction design, and started off in the early 2000s working on exploratory design and research into technologies for city life – games, social mapping applications, and even service design for urban amenities like parks. I also worked with Elizabeth – three times now! – with the last project designing a prototype chat application
- How many people here are familiar with interaction design and what designers do? Here’s a job posting for example. It’s not very informative. But User needs Business goals Specifications Collaboration
- IDEO founder Bill Moggridge is widely credited for inventing the term in the late 1980s to describe how trained designers – rather than engineers – would approach the interweaving of input devices, software, and outputs that characterizes digital products. LOOK AND FEEL Interface designers in the 1980s styled the “look” of a software application or website. They chose colors and typefaces, created iconic symbols, and arranged elements into a visual composition. They often selected words to label functionality, such as “save” or “paste.” Interface design also included some aspects of film and animation/ Unlike objects on a paper page, digital objects in a GUI could transform dynamically. They could change color, appear and disappear, and move around the screen, giving them a dynamic “feel.” DIGITAL BEHAVIOR The notion of behavior, which took hold in the mid1990s, expands interaction design beyond the surface of a two-dimensional screen to the organization of content and the execution of functionality.A behavioral stance includes both the logic of software and the data organization – databases, file structures, and so on -- that enables it. The left graphic, by Stanford professor Bill Verplank, demonstrates both of those ideas. Display, metaphor, and control are questions of look and feel. Error, scenario, task, and model are questions of behavior. MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCES In recent years, however, advocates of the “meaning-making” position on interaction design have argued that the word “interaction” is a misnomer. What designers must shape is “experience” or “activities”— not what machines do but how they afford humans new possibilities to act and feel – like having a moment of intimacy on a crowded street in the photograph to the right. It is from this perspective that many designers expand the concerns of interaction design. Interaction design is usually defined as concerning software, but if your concern is experiences, then you might also be concerned with physical environment or company operations.
- Why would I care? The more research I did, the more pervasive the profession’s reach seems. Interaction design in the mid-1990s started with the Web. Today, it’s gone far beyond the screen. Interaction designers are employed not just Ebay, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple et cetera Consumer electronics companies: Samsung, GE, Car companies: Ford, Toyota, etc (dashboards) Advertising agencies Governments Basically, if you have recently checked your email, withdrawn money from an, called your mom, used a washing machine, or checked into a plane flight you have encountered the work of someone who calls him or herself an interaction designer.
- So I wanted to know more about this influential profession. If interaction designers are at least partially responsible for so many of the experiences that shape our lives, how they go about their work matters. Helping them do their work better matters. But most of the academic literature I found, however, was on engineers – not the same thing! And it involved Most of the popular literature was interesting and useful for professional purposes, but both promotional and autobiographical. It wasn’t scholarly and didn’t adhere to the depth or standards of rigor that you’d want in a really reliable study of a new profession. So I decided to do my own study – on people who identify themselves as interaction designers – not software engineers. And I decided to make it observational.
- 4 projects at 3 consultancies – small, medium, large AND tangible boutique / architecture-oriented firm / branding-oriented agency. All in SoMA. In-person observation with intermittent interviews over chat and voice. Interviews with in-house designers at startups and large corporations and more South Bay designers to balance it out Participation in recommended professional education sites, like conferences, handbooks, websites Audio and video recording for analysis later. Rounds of observation, analysis, writing, and recruiting. This is derived from a methodological tradition called grounded theory. The idea is that these iterative cycles of recruiting and writing let you produce and test hypotheses about the dimensions and phases of a phenomenon rather than to establish statistical validity. These are all standard qualitative techniques for producing rigorous work.
- Of course, the relationship between the thing you use to check your mail and the interaction designers’ specifications is somewhat attenuated. Most interaction designers – in, particular, the consultancies that I studied -- do not build their own working systems. Instead, they generate specifications in the form of text and diagrams that they pass on to programmers. Here are three standard examples of the diagrams that are the foci of most of their attention and work. I’ve taken them from templates that are freely available online and used quite widely within the industry. The wireframe – the arrangement of interface elements on a visual field The site architecture – the organization of different pages, screens, or sections The flow – how sequences of pages accomplish important tasks for people One thing that’s immediately noticeable is how far these representations are from the experience you might have. I took this for granted for many years as an interaction designer, but I suspect it will be immediately obvious to people who look at them with fresh eyes. These representations are Static: there are no animated dropdowns, the hyperlinks don’t work, there’s no data to update the page Stripped down: there is a limited visual syntax of boxes and arrows in basically black and white.
- What I’m going to lay out today is a series of thoughts about the importance of physical performance – like performance on a stage – to interaction design. But first, I need to begin by introducing some of the big tensions that I witnessed and that people told me about. To do that, I’m going to tell a story about a project that went very, very wrong. I’m telling this story because, while it doesn’t represent the typical project for the firm or for most of the designers I spoke to, many people had similar stories. So we can see this as a good example of what happens when projects go wrong. I choose it because, first, I was there. And second, because it illustrates all of the problems designers complain about. Defining scope, or planning what concrete objects designers will make in the time allotted, requires continuing negotiation with clients and other project constituencies over what designers will draw and make. If you recall the job posting, that’s the collaborating part and the identification of user needs and business goals part. These continuing negotiations are complicated by the problems of representing the dynamic behavior of human and machines with the trade’s standard static, “flat” boxes-and-arrows diagrams. For consultancy teams need persuasive reasons to convince clients and other stakeholders, such as developers, to commit limited resources, including time and money, to the implementation of the teams’ specifications — even as those low fidelity specifications do not fully convey the behavior of the digital systems or the humans who use them. In the job posting, that’s the specifications part. They need, then, to manage stakeholders in order to produce and sustain alignment between what everyone is doing and their expectations for everyone else. That’s also collaboration.
- So before we go on, I want to define what I mean by performance. Drawing on the multidisciplinary field of Performance Studies Performances are bounded. They have a beginning, a middle, and an end. When some academics talk about “performance,” they mean a much more extended or indefinite phenomenon. There’s a concept, for example, in sociology called “the performance of self” – how we show ourselves to others. Performances require a division between “onstage” actor and offstage audience. That boundary differs from one type of performance to the next. It usually takes some effort to make, though – whether building a separate space, like in a traditional theater, or reminding people not to get to close to the fire juggler. The audiences, however, are as much a part of the performance as the actor.
- Here’s what performance looks like in everyday interaction design work. I’m showing this particular snippet to you because it’s both ordinary and extraordinary. It’s ordinary in that this is a very mundane meeting about a very routine project in a genre – ecommerce – that is particularly standardized. Alan, the male designer, begins by announcing a misunderstanding of Audrey, the female designers, intentions with this sketch. He reads the sketch as including something – a window that reveals pictures of what’s for sale in each section – that Audrey didn’t intended. Audrey steps in and explains what she really meant – not a dropdown but a bar that gets bigger and smaller. This distinction turns less on a technical difference than on an aesthetic “feel” that for Audrey differentiates the dropdown from the bar. I’m not trying to present a full transcription, blah blah blah – just enough so that you can follow the dialogue. [play video] So what makes this a good representation of what I mean by performance and interaction design? It’s a bounded event – this walkthrough is going to begin and end. It involves witnesses – Alan and Audrey are both junior designers talking in front of a senior interaction designer and a senior visual designer. They need the seniors to agree and help them figure out what to do. And it involves storytelling – in this case, what the website is going to do when a user clicks on a link. It’s not Gone with the Wind or Shakespeare, but it’s a good example of the kind of stories that your business depends upon.
- So what does performance mean for those tasks we just described? Let’s think about that performance we just saw. Audrey played the role of a system In the example above, from another walkthrough from the same project, Audrey is showing the team a set of wireframes. There is no system. Just these black and white, static drawings. There are no users. Just Audrey and the team. They are trying to make some decisions about the navigation directions. They have to make a decision on the basis of their own guesses about how future users will perceive the system described in the drawings when it’s implemented.
- What I mean by “agency” is two things. (1) In social theory, “agency” usually means “the capacity to act.” You have agency if you can affect or alter a situation. In management theory – “agency theory” describes the relation Designers are agents; managers are principals. Agency theory typically asks how principals can stop agents from acting badly – whether through incompetence, dishonesty, or malice. Agency is often difficult for designers because they are, in a sense, liaisons between users and managers. Let’s look at how another consultancy – MediumFirm – handled negotiations over agency with a French client.
- So let’s return to scoping – and the picture that began this talk. Scoping means controlling the extent of work. That’s incredibly important in technology companies like this one, because feature or infrastructure development can get out of control quickly, endangering timelines and budgets. Not to mention user experience! The central dilemma of interaction design, like most forms of design, is that what they are designing does not exist yet – by definition. And unfortunately, the kinds of diagrams and specifications that interaction designers make are low-fidelity – they are not intended to accurately represent the system in action. And for people who are interested in user needs, basing decisions on those needs can be difficult when there are no users present at all the design meetings! Moreover, designers can’t build the system on their own. They need the support of managers, programmers, marketers, and so on. But they have to get this support with specs that everyone agrees aren’t good enough – generally because making perfect specs costs too much time and money. Gaining the support of stakeholders usually involves make changes or compromises to the diagrams, which can be easily changed since they’re digital. But as the designers of LittleStudio found out, stakeholders who don’t understand the consequences of their requests can easily destroy the schedule and budget – and hence, the project. Project decisions, even if the diagrams can be changed, or the definitions of the market can be changed, must at a certain point stay stable to move forward. So how do designers do that? My argument is that performance stabilizes decisions by firming up identities. Enactive practices like roleplay, when convincing, induce these justifiable feelings, rooted in participation in storytelling. When those enactive practices draw in stakeholders as participants and witnesses, they help negotiate some of those problems of agency – of having designers act on behalf of other stakeholders. When everyone comes to agreement – even if grudging -- about what the designers can do, what the business needs are, and what the users want, they are essentially establishing “facts” about the project that can help explain why diagrams need to be changed – or should not be. And that’s how performance is necessary to keeping the scope of projects – and products – doable.
- Classically, people who study and teach design talk about the importance of seeing – in which seeing is critical to thinking. But seeing is a kind of internal, individual act. In coming up with these ideas about the role of performance, I’ve found it more helpful to my own practice and as a teacher to talk more about showing – which helps us supplement recommendations for being more creative with suggestions for how we might be more effective at getting our creative ideas off the ground.
- The notion of “design thinking” has been thrown around a lot. Business notion of a kind of logic grounded in synthesis, empathy, and problem-solving Academic notion of a single form of cognition Theories of cognition emphasize individuals We are moving to theories of doing How decisions are made and executed in groups The job posting gets at some of these skills in specifying and “collaborating,” but discusses them in terms of software and specification types. That’s not just Ebay – it’s characteristic of the field. My point here is that successful projects rely on a wider array of skills, and that we can only see the importance of those skills when we broaden the scope of what we study away from “thinking” and towards doing.
- I want to close with challenge from a colleague at the design research firm, SonicRim. [[ Read it ]] My hope is that