高手帮忙翻译下，不要用工具，翻译出来要语句通顺，谢谢了4~

The design of interactive systems, viewed from this account,
is supposed to progress gradually from the abstract requirements
specification to the resulting artifact: the computer system. The
conservative account assumes that there is a problem to be solved,
and that the descriptions of this problem can be comprehensively
and accurately produced in the form of a requirements specification
to be fed into a design process, which culminates with the designed
interactive system.
Thus, methodology and structure are the heart of understanding
and practicing design, and the designer’s role is that of an engineer
or a natural scientist.16 In the conservative account, the designer
is seen as a “glass box” 17 in the sense that every step of the process
is suggested as rational and possible to describe.
Schön identifies sources of incompleteness inherent in the
conservative model which cannot explain the initial creation of
complex design structures; nor can account for the dialectical transformation
of structures observed in the ways designers learn through
designing. The issue of disagreement is the idea of a design structure:
the designer’s representation of a problem together with the rulegoverned
procedures that guide his transformation of it. For Schön,
representation and procedures must be compatible. For the model
of design as rational decisions, the design structure is assumed to
be given with the presented problem. A rational decision process
can occur only within such a structure. Hence, the model does not
explain how design structures are made and remade in the course
of designing. According to Schön, the model coming from the rationalistic
tradition is limited either to the special class of artificially
constructed problems—where design structure is given from the
beginning—or to the later phases of designing—where it takes the
form of technical problem-solving within a stabilized structure.
In actual designing, design proposals often are complex, interdependent
on each other, and significant in their impact on design
structures. This complexity, which Schön calls “figural,” is in contrast
to the combinatorial or merely additive. Addition or subtraction of
one element changes the functional meaning of other elements, with
the result that the proposal must be considered different as a whole.
Examples of figural complexity are found in the drawings of the
Gestalt psychologists, computer programs, and human organizations—
where a change in one element (position, function, or feature)
can produce significant changes in other elements and in the system
as a whole. Complexity is closely linked to interdependence.
The “romantic account” of the design process suggests it is
not a fully rational and explicable process; it has something “mystical.”