Author’s framework for an interactive design, at its core is a system which takes in user input in great detail, comes up with something meaningful based on it, and delivers it in a effortlessly comprehensible fashion. For a strongly interactive system indeed all three make up the skeleton. That might be the reason, author didn’t mention anything about the aesthetics or visual elements of it. What comes up to my mind is Wikipedia, it does fulfill the above criteria, but is it really interactive. I’m not referring to the reading part of that website but the user experience. Obviously, its goal is productivity not interactivity. But it does highlight the of visual to beautify the skeleton. On the contrary, there is ilovepdf.com, its goal is productivity but it is a lot more interactive.
For the sketches, I will want to highly focus on gathering user input data. Instead of getting a lot of different inputs, I want to choose a particular point, and get very detailed input on that part, and then create as much as processing and interaction from it. I remember a artwork by a student, it made birds move on the canvas, based on the people walking in front of it. It worked for multiple people independently. The amount of detail in it was amazing. For every action of user, like walking raising hands, jumping etc had somewhat interaction embedded, and it was not random. The focus on detail was prominent. That was I want my sketches to have, the scale is irrelevant. I want to keep them simple but sophisticated.