geo@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU (George Bray) (06/29/91)
Dave Lockwood wrote:
>Sometimes an icon, like a word, can gain meaning from context.
Oh Yes! There can be different messages given with ICON, ICON/ICON and
ICON/WORD combinations.
If the pictures are global enough to understand
at the ICON representation (a 'card' for a noun example and 'post'
for a verb example) then two icons strategically placed would spell
"Post Card".
Where the meaning of what you are trying to get across could be
misunderstood using two icons, use an Icon and a Word.
If worse comes to worst, use an ICON and lots of words.
So the level of understanding (conception) is based on context. This
is important as the application is an electronic book. You can
point to some text in a book and label it in some meaningful way.
At the top level, I have the main concept types. Our theory is that
concepts have type. These types are things like Assertion, Citation,
Word, Person, Place, Money, Time, Video.
These types are fine for what *I* the designer understand your concept
to be, but I want you the user to define any type you like. It
is this for which I require an icon.
If you were to ask me some apt words to describe this, I would say
unto you.
Unknown, Nothing, Empty, Elsewhere, Unrelated,
Question, Entropy, Gap, Artifact
In a heirarchical sense, it's the ROOT as John D. Burger points out.
George Bray
Fuzzy Logicians Inc
--
George Bray
CSIRO Division of Information Technology > Phone: +61 2 887 9307
PO Box 1599 North Ryde 2113 AUSTRALIA > Fax: +61 2 887 7787
Internet: George.Bray@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU > CompuServe: 72711,253