Okay, so, how about this:http://www.humanized.com/about/
I think right after I posted how I use UI's and CLI together in a harmonious way that converges when and how to use both in an effective manner someone posted a link to these guys. I'm not trying to single you out humanoidz; but, modes cause misery written on a computer, posted on the internet, to a blog makes me think you don't get it. Maybe it's just the way you are framing it or maybe.... That whole 'humanize' thing doesn't make sense to me. It's give and take with some friction for any long lasting bond between any constituent parts. If user experience is going to always assume users are static rather than dynamic and make things that do not evolve are they really humanizing or are they creating barriers between progress? And morphing interaction design into some we do it for the user thing...I think my original interest and the reason I found the IxDA is because of my want to make the design process not s*ck so much and bridge that gap of ambiguity between dev team members. Yea, I'm all for the user; but, if you can't get one clear line of communication across the titled dev sphere what is the point..? I think natural language search engines is the term I heard around the first .com fizzle doing what is resurfacing and being mentioned here. If you could capture the input and organize it based on relevance on the fly you could use a beefed up ajax input form field to aid you in your command line interaction search activities... On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk < [email protected]> wrote: > > On Mar 30, 2009, at 12:50 PM, dave malouf wrote: > > Ubiquity is a tremendous evolution of the CLI concept, but taking it >> further in important ways. From the End User perspective it is what I >> have been describing as CLI with GUI support. The other component is >> the developer framework which makes creating ubiquity commands pretty >> easy. >> > > Agreed. > > Another important concept that goes hand in hand with this is that things > like Ubiquity work because they embrace modality. That is, you enter a mode > to scope the context to deliver a certain set of functions in specific ways. > The mode doesn't have to be a locked out mode, but can easily be more > ephemeral, like with Ubiquity. > > Modality in the past has often been thought of as a bad thing. Unfortunate > really because modality is actually a fairly important interface concept in > designing software and digital products. Knowing when and where to use > modality is the trick, and maybe its time for folks to dive back into the > old desktop app days to see what types of modality worked and what didn't > and start bringing those things back into the general software design > language again. > > The biggest danger or hurdle Ubiquity has solve is basically the same as a > UNIX CLI or what Enso had to handle: The threshold where the number of > textual commands or services overwhelms one's ability to remember the entire > list of commands via text. Ubiquity will more than likely have a better shot > at this since it also has the benefit of context (as defined by the URL in > the browser) to create the first level of scoping the problem. > > -- > Andrei Herasimchuk > > Chief Design Officer, Involution Studios > innovating the digital world > > e. [email protected] > c. +1 408 306 6422 > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! > To post to this list ....... [email protected] > Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe > List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines > List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help > ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [email protected] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
