1 / 10

Multilingualism and Just-in-time Feedback on the Web

Multilingualism and Just-in-time Feedback on the Web. Leveling the learning curve for a truly international virtual experience (changing the tools instead of forcing the culture). Radu Luchianov: HOTLab, 03 October 2003, Carleton University, Ottawa. Problem examples. Interactive examples.

kalani
Download Presentation

Multilingualism and Just-in-time Feedback on the Web

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multilingualism and Just-in-time Feedbackon the Web Leveling the learning curve for a truly international virtual experience(changing the tools instead of forcing the culture) Radu Luchianov: HOTLab, 03 October 2003, Carleton University, Ottawa

  2. Problem examples Interactive examples Linguistic vandalism Clickeaza vs. Apasa Switched word order specific modifiers Icon opacity save/open icon evolution The WorldWideWait Guess-the-function • Baloon help • Monade (under development) (graph editor) • eastcree.org: • read-along • stories database • MoStaCon Tools • Flash • DHTML • Java • Other scripting options with cross-platform support

  3. Research objectives • Design: Implement theory in functional prototypes • Test: Verify/Validate theoretical and practical assumptions (e.g. • multilingualism vs. “internationalization” • JIT feedback vs. decoupled or serial “help” sources) Existing technology Theory (MonDoc) Design Experiment

  4. Creation Idea Prototype Use Some ubiquitous feedback loops Supports everything else Currently dissociated,spatially and culturally,due to economic constraints Reply-interaction End-user Maintenance Collaboration Function Designer Mutualcomprehension Tester Form Programmer Expression Userside Continuous specialization Systemside Existing Web technologiesallow for JIT interactivity. JITF multilingual presentation is still problematic.

  5. Design Theory Theoretical assumptions Action Theory Functionality Prototype functional description Use at agiven moment Prototype implementation Personalexperience Uses for aspecific task Currentgoal Interface features should change too Possible uses Goal analysis(mostly sub-conscious) Explicit knowledge Implicit knowledge(perceptual and conceptual) Continuous system feedback(conceptual and perceptual) Layers of interaction • Representation based on abstraction(from sensory perception) • Features follow function • Function is context-based • Unexpected effects • Cross-layer feature interactions • due to label scarcity or conceptual proximity (e.g. Search/Browse, Browse/Select) • Memory effects on action recall

  6. Shopping carts are designedbetter, with the pivoting wheelsin the back. Design Functionality • In real products, function is based on applied physics (engineering, ergonomics) • In software, function is based on correct instructions (exhaustively verified algorithms and interfaces) • … but the computer is not the only element at work; it is not enough to provide functionality, the system is also responsible to make that functionality accessible: • fit the interaction model the user expects, or JITF: • guide the user to understand the internal model of the product, or • change the internal model to fit specific user cultures Badly designed stroller, requires a lot of force to handle, thus breaks fast and stalls very often.

  7. Affordance • Features of an object which suggest its possible uses • Context-based reasoning is heavily influenced by perceived affordances. • However, affordance, especially for symbols is mostly conventional, thus culture-dependent. “Move the cursoron the screen with the mouse” Undo

  8. Aesthetics • used to be neglected, though it positively influences perceived affordance and helps focus attention Test Test Link Plain Button Nice, realistic Button

  9. Some stumbling blocks • for Multilingualism • Different grammatical rules(creating multilingual generators is usually overkill) (computer-oriented NLP research vs. pragmatic interaction) • Uncharted cultural differences (inter- and intra-group differences in symbol assignment and norms) • Inaccessibility to functional and formal differences in designers vs. end-users(non-HCI designers create tools based on their own cultural biases; differences are apparent only after product is distributed) • Current technological hiatus (Unicode) • for Just-in-time feedback • Reducing perceptual load (hiding complexity) can increase user confusion (especially in less technically-inclined cultures) • Layout modification issues • General reluctance to Virtual media • Economic issues (income from training)

  10. Thank You

More Related