@cak Architectural theory is a kind of fascination of mine. I’m really into the works of Christopher Alexander and I asked this question to see how a discussion between so-called “lay people” would correspond with what he says would arise in such a discussion.
So far, it looks like people have confirmed some of his points. For instance, in a chapter in A Pattern Language, on “courtyards which live,” he concludes:
“Place every courtyard in such a way that there is a view out of it to some larger open space; place it so that at least two or three doors open from building into it and so that the natural paths which connect these doors or doorways pass across the courtyard. And, at one edge, beside a door, make a roofed veranda or porch, which is continuous with both the inside and the courtyard.”
Personally, I would love a courtyard that opened to the south of the building off a wide arcade (which would serve as the “porch” in Alexander’s description), with some vines growing on the exterior of the arcade to filter the sunlight coming from the south (if in the northern hemisphere). The enclosing wall opposite the arcade/porch would be much shorter than the other walls, no more than 6 or 7 feet, so that as much sun could get in as possible. on that wall would be an arched entrance onto a park or meadow, and on one of the two walls adjacent the porch would be an inset door, and on the other a large opening (that is, not an arch but a place where the wall takes a break) where there would be a smaller court, with only two walls, one of which would have a door going into another wing of the main building. Perhaps an old tree in the southwest corner, and nooks and crannies all around the walls, with benches, stone paths, and lots of greens and a few flowers, not too obsessively arranged, and a fountain, so that there can be some water (I definitely agree with bigbanana on that).
Thoughts?