One of the main frustrations I have with architecture is that much of my work is unbuilt. Another way of saying this, is that it most of my career feels like I wasted my time on designing spaces that will ever be of use to anyone. So for a long time, I wanted to see if there was a way to change that. How can we keep the ideas we explored, even if it's not built. I've delved into virtual realms and games like Second Life. They were interesting experiments, but ultimately I decided simulated environments feel strange. Similarly, skeuomorphism was also explored in early iOS versions, when icons tried to simulate the real objects, like iBooks looked like bookshelves. But later versions steered away from skeuomorphic elements as users became familiar with mobile interfaces.
Space in a digital realm should not need to be the same space in the analog world. The relevant concepts can be kept, but they must be reinterpreted. For example, light and shadow in architecture is a key concept, but in the digital realm, is it key? Light and shadow should end up being a dialog about UI and translucency, visibility of layers, object interactions and shifting focus between digital elements. It should feel like there is light and shadow interplaying, even though there is none. Light and shadow for space means a play of dynamic contrast, a concept that can easily be translated into the realm of UI.
So my approach for creating Inclr became about designing a sense of space using architectural principles, within the realm of UI. I find this incredibly interesting. I actually feel for the data in Inclr, much like I would feel for a nice urban space. Feeling for something or not is one of the key principles of Inclr. How does the space within Inclr feel? Does the UX feel like a journey where you aren't supposed to see the whole path, but are made to discover it. As Inclr grows, the number of pathways will grow into a digital landscape, an urban masterplan. Wouldn't that be just serene...
