View source for ((in)ter)dependence/Seamless and Seamful

[[Category:((in)ter)dependence]]
We read the text "Beautiful Seams": Strategic Revelations  and Concealments<ref>Inman, S. and Ribes, D. (2019) 'Beautiful Seams.' https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300508.</ref>, that talks about the seeming dichotomy between seamful and seamless.

 Roughly, seamless design emphasizes
     clarity, 
     simplicity,
     ease of use, 
     and consistency to facilitate technological interaction.
 
 In contrast, seamful design emphasizes 
     configurability, 
     user appropriation, 
     and revelation of complexity, 
                       ambiguity, 
                       or inconsistency
</blockquote>

To us, the properties of seamless and seamful are not mutually exclusive. For example, thinking about seams in software: if everything was open source, everything would be 'perfectly configurable'. However, without a certain ease-of-use, this configurability wouldn't be accessible to many. So for there to be this seamful configurability, there has to be a certain ease of use, a certain level of seamlessness. 

Similarly, we are experiencing this tension between seamless and seamful in our editorial group, in our reading and communicating. 

 Language is a complex thing.
 We need to cooperate with eachother as individuals,
     in a seamful way,
         by keeping an eye out for configurability through access needs,
         finding appropration of communication together,
         cherishing revelations of complexity, ambiguity or inconsistency
     but require a certain seamless,
         for example in clarity of access needs and communication.

The text proposed to make seams “into explicit resources for interaction" (Chalmers), meaning that users are  able to interact with information that is usually hidden away. The example of showing that the wi-fi connection is bad is a fruitful one, because when the strength of the signal is displayed, people had agency and suggestion in terms of how to get better connectivity. They could move with their electronic device to find better signal, instead of remaining both passive and without enough information on why something is not working 'properly'.

How might we find seamful agency in our editorial approach?

<noinclude>
==References==
<references />
</noinclude>