Abstract
Current methods for abstraction of task descriptions within the behavioral view are ad hoc, leading to imprecision, inconsistency, and ambiguity in task- and user-centered interface design representations. However, as interaction designers communicate with software designers and implementers, precise and consistent design representations are crucial.
Our experience with the User Action Notation (UAN) reveals the most difficulty in lower levels of abstraction, those levels just above the articulatory level of task description. This level is crucial in interface design because it is the level at which user actions are used to manipulate interface artifacts, or widgets. Even cases believed to be simple and well understood, such as the select task, are seen to be problematic. We argue for inclusion of semantics in task abstraction. We also argue for guiding lower level abstraction within the task-subtask hierarchy by bringing to bear other kinds of abstraction hierarchies, particularly domain-oriented and taxonomical hierarchies.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Berliner, D. C., Angell, D., and Shearer, J. W. Behaviors, Measures, and Instruments for Performance Evaluation in Simulated Environments. In Proceedings of Symposium and Workshop on the Quantification of Human Performance, 1964.
Hartson, H. R., and Gray, P. D. Temporal Aspects of Tasks in the User Action Notation. Human-Computer Interaction. 7(1992), 1–45.
Hartson, H. R., Siochi, A. C., and Hix, D. The UAN: A User-Oriented Representation for Direct Manipulation Interface Designs. ACM Trans, on Info. Sys. 8, 3 (July 1990), 181–203.
Hix, D., and Hartson, H. R. Developing User Interfaces: Ensuring Usability Through Product and Process. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1993.
Kirwan, B., and Ainsworth, L. K. A Guide to Task Analysis., 1992.
Laurel, B. K. “Interface as mimesis.” Chapter 4 in User Centered System Design. Norman and Draper ed. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1986, 67–85.
Lenorovitz, D. R., Phillips, M. D., Ardrey, R. S., and Kloster, G. V. “A Taxonomic Approach to Characterize Human-Computer Interfaces.” Human-Computer Interaction. Salvendy ed. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., Amsterdam, 1984, 111–116.
Mayo, K. A. Task Mapping Model (TMM) Analysis Manual: A Reference. TR-93–07, Department of Computer Science, Virginia Tech (VPI&SU), Blacksburg, Virginia, 1993.
Mayo, K. A., and Hartson, H. R. Synthesis-Oriented Situational Analysis in User Interface Design. In Proceedings of EWHCI’93: Third East-West International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Moscow, August 3–6)., 1993, 134–150.
Moran, T. P. The Command Language Grammar: A Representation for the User Interface of Interactive Computer Systems. Int. J. Man-Machine Studies. 75 (1981), 3–51.
Tauber, M. J. ETAG: Extended Task Action Grammar—A Language for the Description of the User’s Task Language. In Proceedings of IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT’90 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland), Cambridge, U.K., August 27–31, 1990, 163–168.
Weiler, H. G., and Hartson, H. R. Metaphors for the Nature of Human-Computer Interaction in an Empowering Environment: Interaction Style Influences the Manner of Human Accomplishment. 8 (1992), 313–333.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 EUROGRAPHICS The European Association for Computer Graphics
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hartson, H.R., Mayo, K.A. (1995). A Framework for Precise, Reusable Task Abstractions. In: Paternó, F. (eds) Interactive Systems: Design, Specification, and Verification. Focus on Computer Graphics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-87115-3_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-87115-3_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-87117-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-87115-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive