To the risk of putting myself on the wrong side of the architectural profession (to which I also belong), I’ll say that home isn’t about walls (brick and mortars, prefab…) and openings. It is about people’s (ritualized or memorable) interaction with architectural elements. You would recognize a place as a home, less because of the fact that an architectural element has a particular attribute, for example a window placed in a particular space, but because one has a particular interaction with it, for example  looking out of a window waiting for a particular person to come by. Sure, you could talk about that particular space’s affordance, a space provoking a behavior or the fact that a house was made according to a particular/personal program (hence a tight involvement with the making process and materiality). But think about Eileen Gray’s E-1027 house and Le Corbusier’s obsession to possess it. Home making articulates around the possession and dispossession of space. I’ve been researching home making when one spends shorter periods in different spaces (what is home when on the move?). One feels the need to adapt swiftly to spaces or denies it. The artist Do Hu Suh, places LA-Seoul home in abstract spaces, a way to create a comfort zone. It is a lighter building to transport than a home. The making process (sewn by old Korean ladies) along with the shape (the replica of a traditional Korean house) is a representation of home. The act of placing it in a foreign (less comfortable) space is home making. When assessing belongings, one assesses home, which in fact isn’t about a shell, but the evolving collection of things and recollections. Rambling. Moving… How much space does home take.