Architecture elements for highly-interactive business-oriented applications

  • François Bodart
  • Anne -Marie Hennebert
  • Jean -Marie Leheureux
  • Isabelle Sacré
  • Jean Vanderdonckt
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 753)


It is now widely recognized that powerful architecture elements are needed for implementing highly-interactive business-oriented applications during at least two stages of the whole lifecycle, namely the specification and the design. In this paper, we deal with the architecture model of the TRIDENT project, which introduces three components: the semantic core component, the dialog component and the presentation component. This is a hierarchical object-oriented architecture relying on the use of three kinds of objects: application objects, dialog objects, and interaction objects. Specification and rule languages are given for developing the dialog component. An abstract data model is used for characterizing the application objects. Selection rules are given for choosing appropriate interaction objects for the presentation component according to the abstract data model and to the user level.


Architecture Model Semantic Function Interaction Object State Transition Diagram Application Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    D. de Baar, J.D., Foley, K.E. Mullet: Coupling Application Design and User Interface Design. In P. Bauersfled, J. Bennett, G. Lynch (eds.): Proceedings of CHT92 (Monterey, May 1992). Reading: Addison-Wesley 1992, pp. 259–266Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. Bass, J. Coutaz: Developing Software for the User Interface. Series in Software Engineering. Reading: Addison-Wesley 1991Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. Bodart, J. Vanderdonckt: Expressing Guidelines into an Ergonomical Style-Guide for Highly Interactive Applications. In S. Ashlund, K. Mullet, A. Henderson, E. Hollnagel, T. White (eds.): Adjunct Proceedings of InterCHI'93 (Amsterdam, 24–29 April 1993), New York: ACM Press 1993, pp. 35–36Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S.K. Card, T.P. Moran, A. Newell: The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., 1985Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Coutaz: PAC: an Implementation Model for Dialog Design. In H.-J. Bullinger, B. Shakel (eds.): Proceedings of Interact'87 (Stuttgart, Sept. 1987). Amsterdam: North Holland 1987, pp. 431–436Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. Greif: The User Interface of a Personal Calendar Program. In Y. Vassiliou (ed.): Human Factors and Interactive Computer Systems, NYU Symposium on User Interfaces Proceedings (New York, 26–28 May 1982). Series in Human/-Computer Interaction. Norwood, Ablex Publishing Corp. 1984, pp. 207–222Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.K. Horton: Designing & Writing On line Documentation — Help files to Hypertext. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 1991Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    IBM Systems Application Architecture, Common User Access: Advanced Interface Design Guide. Document SC26-4582-0. Boca Raton: International Business Machines (June 1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    IBM Systems Application Architecture: Basic Interface Design Guide. Document SC26-4583-0. Cary: International Business Machines (December 1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Kim, J.D. Foley: DON: User Interface Presentation Design Assistant. In Proceedings of the UIST'90 Conference (Snowbird, October 1990). New York: ACM press 1990, pp. 10–20Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Kobara, Visual Design with OSF/Motif. Hewlett-Packard Press Series. Reading: Addison-Wesley 1991Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. A. Larson: Interactive Software — Tools for Building Interactive User Interfaces. Yourdon Press Computing Series. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1992Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G.A. Miller: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Science 63, 81–97 (1956)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Z. Mills, M. Prime: Are All Menus the Same? — An Empirical Study. In D. Diaper, D. Gilmore, G. Cockton, B. Shackel (eds.): Proceedings of Interact'90 (Cambridge, 27–31 August 1990). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers 1990, pp. 423–427Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Muter, C. Mayson: The Role of Graphics in Item Selection from Menus. Behaviour and Information Technology 5, 89–95 (1986)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Open Software Foundation. OSF/Motif Style Guide, rev 1.0. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1990Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    B. Sacré, I. Provot: Vers une approche orientée objet de la modélisation du dialogue d'une application de gestion hautement interactive [Towards an objectoriented approach for modelizing dialog in business-oriented highly interactive application]. Fac. Univ. N.-D. de la Paix, Institute of Computer Science. Internal report (October 1990)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Sacré, I. Provot: Proposition d'un langage de spécification de l'interface homme-machine d'une application de gestion hautement interactive [A Proposition for specification language dedicated to the man-machine interface of business-oriented highly interactive application]. Fac. Univ. N.-D. de la Paix, Institute of Computer Science. Internal report (December 1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. Sukaviriya, J.D. Foley, T. Griffith: A Second Generation User Interface Design Environment: The Model and The Runtime Architecture. In: S. Ashlund, K. Mullet, A. Henderson, E. Hollnagel, T. White (eds.): Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems InterCHI'93 “Bridges Between Worlds” (Amsterdam, 24–29 April 1993). New York: ACM Press 1993, pp. 375–382Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D.L. Scapin: Guidelines for User Interface Design: Knowledge Collection and Organization. Report ITHACA.INRIA.89.D12.03. Rocquencourt: Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique, 30 December 1989Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Shneiderman: Designing the user interface: strategies for effective humancomputer interaction. Reading: Addison-Wesley 1987Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    S.L. Smith, J.N. Mosier: Design guidelines for the user interface software. Technical Report ESD-TR-86-278 (NTIS No. AD A177198). Hanscom Air Force Base: U.S. Air Force Electronic Systems Division 1986Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    B. Tognazzini: The Apple//Human interface guidelines. Cupertino: Apple Computer 1985Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. S. Tullis: Designing a Menu-Based Interface to an Operating System. In L. Borman, B. Curtis (eds.): Proceedings of CHI'85 (San Francisco, 14–18 April 1985). New York: ACM Press 1985, pp. 79–84Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    UIMS Workshop Tool Developers: A Metamodel for the Runtime Architecture of An Interactive System. SIGCHI Bulletin, 24, 1, 32–37 (January 1992)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    J. Vanderdonckt: Prise en compte des facteurs ergonomiques dans la conception des interfaces homme-machine. In M. Adiba, F. Bodart, M. Léonard, Y. Pigneur (eds.): Actes des journées de travail de Beaune '91 (Beaune, 5–7 March 1991). Genève: Les Editions Systèmes et Information 1991Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Vanderdonckt, F. Bodart: Encapsulating Knowledge for Intelligent Automatic Interaction Objects Selection. In: S. Ashlund, K. Mullet, A. Henderson, E. Hollnagel, T. White (eds.): Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems InterCHI'93 “Bridges Between Worlds” (Amsterdam, 24–29 April 1993). New York: ACM Press 1993, pp. 424–429Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • François Bodart
    • 1
  • Anne -Marie Hennebert
    • 1
  • Jean -Marie Leheureux
    • 1
  • Isabelle Sacré
    • 1
  • Jean Vanderdonckt
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut d'InformatiqueFacultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la PaixNamurBelgium

Personalised recommendations