Thanks Brian (especially for the comments on the halves),

Your minimalist approach is one that I am leaning towards for the short 
reference animations, which are meant to serve those that already have a good 
understanding of the primitives. For the longer explanatory version for the 
newcomer audience, I do think that the indicators are necessary to make the 
operations more obvious (however, I have been known to be wrong). Certainly, if 
newcomers find the movement and flashes distracting, they can be toned down.

I think the halves animation could definitely benefit from the 'two-stage' 
transition. I do find it interesting that you don't find it easy to visualize 
adding halves and have suggested additional movement; whereas in the areas 
where you have clear concepts (such as operator arguments of different ranks) 
the movement seems excessive. 

I really do think we are looking at a 'minimalist reference animation' vs. 
'expanded introduction animation' split in the development of these animations.

Cheers, bob

On -Mar27-2010, at -Mar27-20105:59 AM, Brian Schott wrote:

> Bob,
> 
> Regarding the extended Plus (dyad) animation:
> 
> I like most of it, but am really put off by two things,
> the example involving halves and the overall movement and blinking.
> 
> The movement and blinking is excessive and distracting to me, so I
> want much less. I am thinking that maybe the only thing that should
> blink is the plus sign and maybe an arrow, not the arguments. And
> nothing except the graph should have movement, only repositioning,
> except perhaps the plus sign or the arrow could pulse or expand, but
> not move.
> 
> The halves example lost me until I looked really hard and I knew what
> you were trying to show; the information in the green bottom was
> especially hieroglyphic to me. I wonder if a 2 stage development might
> work better here, where 2 becomes 4r2 and then 3r2+4r2 becomes 7r2? I
> just don't have any good ideas for visualizing adding halves, though,
> and hope others have ideas.
> 
> A lesser problem for me, as I said before, is the vector and array
> examples, which I believe should be handled elsewhere because they are
> rank/shape issues.
> 
> I do like these new extended demos though and want to encourage and
> thank you for them.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to