Page 91 -
P. 91

60  Chapter 2   Understanding  and conceptualizing interaction


                            amine a web browser interface and describe the various forms of  analogy and composite
                            erface metaphors that have been used in its design. What familiar knowledge has been
                          combined withnew functionality?

            Comment       Many aspects of a web browser have been combined to create a composite interface metaphor:
                              a range of  toolbars, such as a button bar, navigation bar, favorite bar, history bar
                              tabs, menus, organizers
                              search engines, guides
                              bookmarks, favorites
                              icons for familiar objects like stop lights, home
                            These have been combined with other operations and functions, including saving, search-
                          ing, downloading, listing, and navigating.


           2.5  Interaction paradigms

                          At a more general level, another source of inspiration for informing the design of a
                          conceptual model is an interaction paradigm. By this it is meant a particular philos-
                          ophy or way of thinking about interaction design. It is intended to orient designers
                          to the kinds of  questions they need to ask. For many years the prevailing paradigm
                          in interaction design was to develop applications for the desktop-intended to be
                          used by single users sitting in front of  a CPU, monitor, keyboard  and mouse. A
                          dominant part of  this approach was to design software applications that would run
                          using a GUI or WIMP interface (windows, icons, mouse and pull-down menus, al-
                          ternatively referred to as windows, icons, menus and pointers).
                              As mentioned earlier, a recent trend has been to promote paradigms that move
                          "beyond the desktop." With the advent of  wireless, mobile, and handheld technolo-
                          gies, developers started designing applications that could be used in a diversity of ways
                          besides running only on an individual's desktop machine. For example, in September,
                          2000, the clothes company Levis, with the Dutch electronics company Philips, started
                          selling the first commercial e-jacket-incorporating wires into the lining of the jacket
                          to create a body-area network (BAN) for hooking up various devices, e.g.,  mobile
                          phone, MP3, microphone, and headphone (see Figure 1.2(iii) in Color Plate 1). If the
                          phone rings, the MP3 player cuts out the music automatically to let the wearer listen
                          to the call. Another innovation was handheld interactive devices, like the Palmpilot,
                          for which a range of applications were programmed. One was to program the Palmpi-
                          lot as a multipurpose identity key, allowing guests to check in to certain hotels and
                          enter their room without having to interact with the receptionist at the front desk.
                              A  number  of  alternative  interaction paradigms have  been  proposed  by  re-
                          searchers intended to guide future interaction design and system development (see
                          Figure 2.11). These include:

                                ubiquitous computing (technology embedded in the environment)
                                pervasive computing (seamless integration of  technologies)
                                wearable computing (or wearables)
   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96