[comp.cog-eng] Abstract of Tech Report on Information Presentation

perlman@wanginst.EDU (Gary Perlman) (07/25/87)

The following is an abstract of a paper for the 1987 Human Factors
Society meeting in New York.  It is also available as Wang Institute
technical report TR-87-08.

            An Axiomatic Model of Information Presentation

                             Gary Perlman
                            Wang Institute
                        Tyngsboro, MA 01879 USA

The goal of information layout is to physically display information to
reinforce the underlying structure of the information.  In this paper,
I describe an axiomatic model of information layout.  The model has
three levels: (1) a device-independent representation for structured
information, (2) a set of axioms (or rules) relating information
structure with display attributes, (3) a set of device dependent
display attributes used to distinguish differences and show
similarities in information structure.  The model infers, using
logical deductions from its axioms, how display attributes should be
used to show the structure of information.  A prototype software
system exists that allows interactive design and evaluation of screen
layouts.  Future research is planned to develop an expert system to
aid in the automatic design of layouts, and to refine the prototype
into a usable system. 
-- 
Gary Perlman  Wang Institute  Tyngsboro, MA 01879  (617) 649-9731
UUCP: decvax!wanginst!perlman             CSNET: perlman@wanginst

wex@milano.UUCP (07/27/87)

In article <1361@wanginst.EDU>, perlman@wanginst.EDU (Gary Perlman) writes:
> The goal of information layout is to physically display information to
> reinforce the underlying structure of the information.  In this paper,
> I describe an axiomatic model of information layout.  The model has
> three levels: (1) a device-independent representation for structured
> information

[I hope I haven't abstracted out too much context.]

Gary, I'm curious.  I can see how you could fairly easily achieve a
significant level of device independence, but how about
domain-dependence?

For example, there are dozens of "box & arrow"-type languages, each of
which uses slightly different representation based on the domain under
consideration.  EG: KR languages use arrows that go the opposite way
from those used in object-oriented inheritance graphs.

The information is similarly structured (boxes, arrows, hierarchies,
dependencies, etc.), but the representation is governed by the domain
of concern.

Comments welcomed.

-- 
Alan Wexelblat
ARPA: WEX@MCC.COM
UUCP: {seismo, harvard, gatech, pyramid, &c.}!sally!im4u!milano!wex

"Oh well, a touch of grey,
 Kinda suits you anyway."