SIGIA-L Mail Archives: Re: SIGIA-L: Restoring hard-wired cues t
Re: SIGIA-L: Restoring hard-wired cues to navigation
From: Andrew McNaughton (andrew_at_tki.org.nz)
Date: Tue Feb 13 2001 - 04:22:35 EST
Personally I think that the screen is a pretty effective device. The
visual field is not 3 dimensional, and the screen makes effective use of
the available space. bandwith if you like. Designing for the visual
field (albeit cropped) seems to me more to the point than designing for a
reality-like 3D space that might be behind it. (noone said 3D, but
meatspace comes close).
Equally important, a tokenised conceptual model is far quicker to read
once conventions are established than a more reality based interface.
This is the fundamental character of language and textual interfaces, and
I suspect it's here to stay for most purposes.
Andrew McNaughton
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Chris Chandler wrote:
> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:39:47 -0800 (PST)
> From: Chris Chandler <cchandle267_at_yahoo.com>
> To: Adam Greenfield <agreenfield_at_e-agency.com>, sigia-l_at_asis.org
> Subject: Re: SIGIA-L: Restoring hard-wired cues to navigation
>
> Interesting.
>
> One the one hand, I think it's very important for us
> Information Architect type people to not get too
> attached to the 'screen.'
>
> Someday we'll look back at the desktop/window
> metaphors with the same feeling we have towards the
> handcrank on early model cars -- although I've become
> resigned to just how long these things take.
>
> On the other hand, talk of a "future navigational
> schema of unparalleled intuitive usability" strikes me
> as pure hyperbole -- a product perhaps of an
> uncritical view of "progress."
>
> Architect-architects (if you'll pardon me falling back
> on the foundational metaphor) have been dealing with
> that gravity/friction/acceleration stuff for ages and
> still miss the "intuitive usability" mark more than
> they hit it.
>
>
> --
> Chris Chandler
> Information Architect at large.
>
>
> --- Adam Greenfield <agreenfield_at_e-agency.com> wrote:
> > Here's an idea I've been kicking around for awhile -
> > actually more like a
> > probe. I've thought it over for awhile and can't
> > find any gaping holes in
> > it; I'd love it if you knowledgable folks on the
> > list would help me vet it
> > and find the logical flaws I know must be resident.
> >
> > This is the gist of it:
> >
> > Far from being "99% bad," my guess is that Flash
> > actually points towards a
> > future navigational schema of unparalleled intuitive
> > usability. By endowing
> > objects with attributes such as gravity, friction,
> > acceleration, and bounce,
> > designers like Joshua Davis (www.praystation.com),
> > James Patterson
> > (www.presstube.com) and Yugop Nakamura
> > (www.yugop.com) are beginning to limn
> > a transparent interface in which *computational
> > objects behave like
> > real-world objects*.
> >
> > In such an interface, objects fall, until they hit a
> > surface. They move,
> > slow, and stop. They bounce off each other. Each of
> > these attributes can
> > either be utilized to facilitate the organization of
> > objects (preferable) or
> > mapped to other qualities of those objects (less
> > preferable but still
> > interesting.)
> >
> > As we continue to develop and concretize the
> > metaphor of informational space
> > through which the user navigates in search of a
> > given object, such
> > attributes should aid recall and use tremendously.
> > If objects behave in a
> > manner more reminiscent of that which our meatspace
> > experience has led us to
> > expect, my expectation is that children, the
> > elderly, untrained users and
> > absolute beginners will find that they "already
> > know" how to use such an
> > interface to achieve what they want. After all,
> > they've been navigating it
> > since they first grabbed for a spinning mobile or
> > knocked a glass of milk
> > off a table.
> >
> > I know this is a little more abstract than some of
> > the issues the list has
> > been mulling lately, but I'm preparing an article
> > for publication that
> > depends heavily on this idea and I was hoping that
> > some of you would have
> > some divergent opinions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Adam Greenfield
> > Infotect
> >
> >
> > < next > http://www.v-2.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
> a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
--
Andrew McNaughton
Te Kete Ipurangi: The Online Learning Centre
andrew_at_tki.org.nz
Ph: 64 4 382 6500
Fax: 64 4 382 6509
Mobile: 021 323 076
PO Box 19-098
Wellington, NZ
http://www.tki.org.nz/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:54:31 EST
|
