ABSTRACT
From the point of view of the application designer, user interface services work by factoring some domain common to a range of applications, and implementing this separately. Existing services, such as window managers, UIMSs, or toolkits, either lack generality, or are limited in their separability. A new interface paradigm, here called surface interaction, separates application and interface by factoring presentation and its manipulation, rather than dialogue or functionality. The surface is thus a medium which can be controlled equally by the user or by the application. This paper outlines Presenter, an implementation of a model for surface interaction.
- 1.Adobe System Inc., PostScript Language Reference Manual, Addison-Wesley, 1987. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 2.ASPECT: Specification of the Public Tool Interface, System Designers PLC, 1987.Google Scholar
- 3.Assessment Report for the Aspect HCI, British Aerospace PLC, Preston, January 1988.Google Scholar
- 4.Brown, M.D. Understanding PHIGS, Template, Megatek Corporation, San Diego, 1985.Google Scholar
- 5.Burbeck, S. Applications Programming in Smalltalk- 80: How to Use Model-View-Controller (MVC), Softsmarts Inc., 1987.Google Scholar
- 6.Cobbett, A.P., and Wand, I.C. The Debugging of Large Multi-Task Ada Programs, in Proc Ada UK Conference, York, September 1989.Google Scholar
- 7.Coutaz, J. Abstractions for User Interface Design, IEEE Computer, vol. 18, no. 9, September 1985, pp. 21-34. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 8.Coutaz, J. PAC, an Object Oriented Model for Dialog Design, in Human-Computer Interaction . INTERACT '87 (Participants' Edition), ed. H. -j. Bullinger, B. Shackel, North-Holland, 1987, pp. 431-436.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 9.Daly, W. A Graphical Management System for Semantic, Multimedia Databases (PhD Thesis, in preparation), University of York, 1989. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 10.Davies, A. A Report on the Design and Implementation of UniFile, a Graphically.based File System Manager for the UNIX Operating System (MSc Thesis), University of York, September 1989.Google Scholar
- 11.Foley, J.D. The Structure of Interactive Command Languages, in Methodology of Interaction, ed. R.A. Geudj, P.J.W. ten Hagen, F.R.A. Hopgood, H.A. Tucker, D.A. Duce., North-Holland, 1980, pp. 227- 234.Google Scholar
- 12.Green, M. Report on Dialogue. Specification Tools, in User Interface Management Tools, ed. G. E. Pfaff, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985, pp. 9-20.Google Scholar
- 13.Green, M. A Survey of Three Dialogue Models, ACM Trans. on Graphics, vol. 5, no. 3, July 1986, pp. 244-275. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 14.Hill, R.D.F.vent-Response Systems - A Technique for Specifying Multi-Threaded Dialogues, in Proc. SIGCHI+GI '87: Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, Canada, April 1987, pp. 241-248. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 15.Holmes, S. Overview and User Manual For Doubleview, University of York, 1989.Google Scholar
- 16.Hudson, S.E. UIMS Support for Direct Manipulation Interfaces, ACM Computer Graphics, vol. 21, no. 2, April 1987, pp. 120.124. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 17.Hutchins, E.L., Hollan, J.D., and Norman, D.A. Direct Manipulation Interfaces, in User Centered System Design, ed. D.A. Norman, S.W. Draper, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986, pp. 87-124.Google Scholar
- 18.Lantz, K.A. On User Interface Reference Models, in Proc CHI + GI 1987, ed. J.M. Carroll P.P. Tanner, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 2, April 1987, pp. 36-42. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 19.Olsen, D.R. MIKE: The Menu Interaction Kontrol Environment, A CM Trans. Graphics, vol. 5, no. 4, October 1986, pp. 318-344. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 20.Olsen, D.R. Larger Issues in User Interface Management, ACM Computer Graphics, vol. 21, no. 2, April 1987, pp. 134-137. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 21.Rao, R., and Wallace, S. The X Toolkit - The Standard Toolkit for X Version 11, in Proc USENIX Conf., June 1987, pp. 1 I7-129.Google Scholar
- 22.Scheifler, R.W., and Gettys, J. The X Window System, ACM Trans. Graphics, vol. 5, no. 2, April 1986, pp. 79-109. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 23.Sibert, LW., and D. Hurley, T. W. Bleser, An Object-Oriented User Interface Management System, ACM Computer Graphics, vol. 20, no. 4, August 1986, pp. 259-268. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 24.Spivey, J.M. The Z Notation, Prentice-Hall, 1989 Google ScholarDigital Library
- 25.Stefik, M., Bobrow, D.G., and Kahn, K. M. Integrating Access-Oriented Programming into a Multi- Paradigm Environment, IEEE Software, vol. 3, no. 1, January 1986, pp. 10-18.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 26.Szekely, P. Separating the User Interface from the Functionality of Application Programs (PhD Thesis), CMU, January 1988. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 27.Tanner, P.P. Multi-Thread Input, A CM Computer Graphics, vol. 21, no. 2, April 1987, pp. 142-145. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 28.Took, R.K. Surface Interaction: A Paradigm and Formal Model for the Presentation Level of Applications and Documents (PhD Thesis, in preparation), Computer Science Department, University of York, 1990.Google Scholar
- 29.Whiteley, K. Birch, Mj. and Parker, A. A Mascot 3 Paintbox for Aspect, Proc. Software Engineering 88, Liverpool, July 1988.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Surface interaction: a paradigm and model for separating application and interface
Recommendations
Separating the user interface from the functionality of application programs
Constructing graphical user interfaces for interactive applications is a difficult and time consuming task, typically requiring extensive programming and experimentation with many prototypes. Thus, the ability to package portions of the specification of ...
Comments