skip to main content
10.1145/1148613.1148621acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesihmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Vers des outils pour les équipes de conception d'interfaces post-WIMP

Authors Info & Claims
Published:30 August 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

Programming highly interactive user interfaces remains a complex task with the available software tools. Interviews and observation of 50 design or production teams of industrial products shows the importance of group production between graphics designers, programmers, usability experts and the lead designer. Tools must allow each of them to efficiently produce their part. That imposes new constraints on the architecture of interactive software. We present the solutions used our development suite, Intui-Kit, designed to bridge the gap between interface design and software engineering. We illustrate it on a concrete product development.

References

  1. 1. J. Accot, S. Chatty, Y. Jestin, and S. Sire. Conception des interfaces : et si nous analysions enfin la tâche du programmeur? In Actes d'IHM98, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2. M. Beaudouin-Lafon. Designing interaction, not interfaces. In Proceedings of AVI2004, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3. J. Coutaz. Interfaces homme-ordinateur, conception et réalisation. Informatique, Dunod, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4. P. P. da Silva. User interface declarative models and development environments : A survey. In DSV-IS 2000, pages 207-226, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5. J. Eisenstein, J. Vanderdonckt, and A. Puerta. Adapting to mobile contexts with user-interface modeling. In Third IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, pages 83-92, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6. A. Goldberg and D. Robson. Smalltalk-80 : the language and its implementation. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7. D. Goodman. The Complete HyperCard Handbook. Bantam Books, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8. T. Green. The nature of programming. In J. M. Hoc et al, editor, Psychology of Programming. 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9. D. Harel. Statecharts : A visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 8(3): 231-274, June 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10. R. Jacob, L. Deligiannidis, and S. Morrison. A software model and specification language for non-WIMP user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 6(1): 1-46, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11. E. Lecolinet. XXL : A dual approach for building user interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM UIST, pages 99-108, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12. MacroMedia Press. MacroMedia Director 6 and lingo authorized. Addison-Wesley, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13. C. Mertz and J.-L. Vinot. Conception par maquettage rapide : application à des écrans tactiles pour le contrôle aérien. In Actes de la conférence Ergo-IA'98, Nov. 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14. B. A. Myers. Authoring interactive behaviors for multimedia. In T. Ishiguro, editor, Proceedings of the 9th NEC Research Symposium : The Human-Centric Multimedia Community, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. 15. N. Souchon and J. Vanderdonckt. A review of xml-compliant user interface description languages. In Proceedings of DSV-IS 2003, pages 377-391. Springer-Verlag, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. 16. K. S. Sousa and E. Furtado. An approach to integrate HCI and SE in requirements engineering. In M. Borup Harning and J. Vanderdonckt, editors, Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 workshop on Closing the gaps : Software engineeering and Human-Computer Interaction., 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17. D. Thévenin and J. Coutaz. Plasticity of user interfaces : framework and research agenda. In Proceedings of INTERACT'99. IOS Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. 18. B. Venners and B. Eckel. The C# design process. a conversation with Anders Hejlsberg. http://www.artima.com/intv/csdes.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. 19. W3C Recommendation 14 January 2003. Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.1 Specification. http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. 20. L. Wall. The culture of Perl. Transcription of the keynote address at the Perl Conference in 1997, http://www.perl.com/pub/a/1997/wall/keynote.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Vers des outils pour les équipes de conception d'interfaces post-WIMP

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IHM '04: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on l'Interaction Homme-Machine
        August 2004
        266 pages
        ISBN:1581139268
        DOI:10.1145/1148613

        Copyright © 2004 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 August 2004

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate103of199submissions,52%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader