Valve Exhibit 1035
`Valve v. Immersion
`Scanned by CamScanner
`
`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`Thus we see that the table models the structure that exists in
`the domain of input . devices .. It hel~s in ~n~ing appropriate
`equivalencies, wh1ch IS useful m dealmg w1th 1ssues of device
`independence (to be discussed below). It also helps us relate
`devices to one another. For example, a tablet is to a mouse what
`a joystick is to a trackball.
`Furthermore, if the taxonomy can suggest new transducers in
`a manner analogous to the way the periodic table of Mendelev
`has predicted new elements, then we can have even more confi(cid:173)
`dence in it. We make this claim and cite the "torque sensing• one(cid:173)
`dimensional pressure-sensitive transducer as an example. To our
`knowledge, no such device exists commercially. Nevertheless it is
`a potentially useful device, an approximation of which has been
`demonstrated by Herot and Weinzapfel (1978).
`Three novel input devices demonstrated on video are the bicycle
`as workstation (Roberts, 1989 video), the pointing stick (Rutledge
`and Selker, 1990 video), and the cue ball (Theil, 1991 video).
`Generality and Extensibility
`Choosing the input technologies to be used with a workstation
`often involves a trade-off between two conflicting demands.
`Every task has specialized needs that can be best addressed by a
`specialized technology, yet each workstation is used for multiple
`tasks. Supplying the optimum device for each task is generally
`impossible, so a trade-off must be made.
`Devices must be chosen to give the best coverage of the
`demands of the range of tasks. An important criterion in compar(cid:173)
`ing devices therefore is how broad their coverage is. Stated dif(cid:173)
`ferently, h;w many s~uares in Figure 7.6 can a particular device
`be used to fill? For example, graphics tablets can emulate many
`other transducers (Evans, Tanner, and Wein, 1981). The tablet is
`what could be called an extensible device. This property of exten(cid:173)
`sibility is an important but seldom considered criterion that
`should be used in device selection.
`Relative versus Absolute Controllers
`Another important characteristic of input devices is whether they sense
`absolute or relative values. This has a very strong effect on the nature
`of the dialogues that the system can support with any degree of flu(cid:173)
`ency. As we have seen a mouse cannot be used to digitize map coor(cid:173)
`dinates o• trace a drawing because it does not sense absolute position.
`An example taken from process control, the nulltng problem, occurs
`when absolute transducers are used in designs where one controller
`must be used for different tasks at different times (Buxton, I986a).
`What Our Taxonomy Doesn't Show
`Perhaps the main weakness of the taxonomy presented above is
`that it considers only the continuous aspect of devices. As the
`sample tasks discussed earlier in this chapter illustrated, ot~er fac(cid:173)
`tors, such as the integration of button devices with continuous
`controllers, has a strong impact on a device's perform~nce. ~n
`example is the case of trying to "pick up" and drag an obJeCt With
`~mouse (where the button is integrated) compared to perform(cid:173)
`tng the
`'tis difficult to
`1 ( h
`same transaction using a trackbal w ere 1
`~ld down the button which is not integrated, with the same
`nd that is controllin~ the dragging motion).
`.
`d .
`An ap
`f devices tS foun
`a
`lfl
`proach to capturing this aspect 0
`Uxton Cl990a). A three-state model is developed that can be
`
`Touch, Gesture, and Marking 473
`
`used to characterize both input devices and tasks. By providing a
`common vocabulary to describe both, a means of arriving at an
`appropriate match between the two is provided
`The reader is also referred to Foley, Wallace, and Chan 098?), an
`important early approach to characterizing input; Card, Ma~y,
`and Robertson (1990 1991) an exceUent taxonomy of input deVIces
`that extends the model ctev'eJoped above; and lipscomb and Pique
`0993), a complementary means of categorizing input devices.
`
`CHUNKING AND PHRASING
`
`Much of the rest of this chapter deals with alternative ways of
`articulating commands to the computer. The reading by Buxton
`(1986b) is intended to lay a theoretical foundation for this. The
`main thesis of the paper is that human-machine dialogues can
`benefit by appropriate phrasing similar to that used in written and
`.
`.
`spoken language, and in music.
`Phrasing not only groups together things that are assoctated m
`meaning or purpose, but also makes clear points of closure, that
`is, points at which one can be interrupted, or take a break. M.ost
`human-machine dialogues are compound, for example, selecting
`and positioning, positioning and scaling, navigating and selecting
`(Buxton, 1982; Buxton, 1984 video). The structure that emerges
`from appropriate phrasing can accelerate the process whereby
`novice computer users "chunk" together concepts, thereby build(cid:173)
`ing cognitive skill. Relevant to this issue is Mantei 0990 video), a
`delightful and thought-provoking collection of short clips docu(cid:173)
`menting a variety of mouse use behaviors.
`The reading discusses the nature of skill acquisition and the
`use of phrasing in its acquisition. In so doing, it lays the founda(cid:173)
`tion for how some of the literature on cognitive modeling can be
`extended to apply to the pragmattcand device levels of the inter(cid:173)
`face. Finally, it prepares the reader for the sections that follow(cid:173)
`those that deal with marking, gesture, and two-handed input.
`Modes and Mode Errors
`As originally defined by Norman (1981), a mode error is the mis(cid:173)
`classification of a situation resulting in actions that are inappro(cid:173)
`priate for the true situation. Whenever a particular action has dif(cid:173)
`ferent consequences depending upon the state of the system,
`mode errors may occur. The classic example of this is in text edi(cid:173)
`tors with command-line interfaces. Here, for example, typing the
`word "add" may be interpreted as a command, indicating that
`you are about to add text, or as just another word that you want
`to enter into the document.
`Reducing mode errors is one of the main attractions of direct
`manipulation interfaces (Tesler, 1981). Yet mode errors still occur.
`The best way to prevent them is to provide continuous and mean(cid:173)
`ingful feedback to the user. For example, pressure and movement
`feedback has been shown to be effective in reducing mode errors
`(Sellen, Kurtenbach, and Buxton, 1992).
`
`MARKING
`
`There is increasing interest in a style of interaction that has been
`variously called "paperlike," "pencentric," "pen based, • •character
`recognition, • or "gesture driven." Yet many of these are not like
`paper, and many do not use a pen. What all have in common is
`that the user's input is in the form of a stream of x,ycoorclinates
`
`Scanned by CamScanner
`
`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

`Ml KC!I\Jio, I. S., and IIUJitln, W, (1992). '-!lllcmdlng I'ILIJ' lAw W
`'t'WO·Dimcn•lontl Tuk~. l'roc. Cl/1 '92, AC.M, 219a226.
`MacKcm~la, 1. !j., Sellen, A. and !Iuxton, W. (I!J<JI), A c.,rnJ>arllnll
`of Input J)c:wlceA In l!ltlmenllll l'olnt.lng llfltlDJ"K811lll 'l'ukl . /'roc.
`Clll '91, ACM, 161- 166.
`MacKen~lo, I. S., 11nd Ware, C. (1 9'),,). lAg u M l)et.crrnlu~m or
`!Iuman l'orform•nce In lntcrllctlvc sy~t em-. /'roc. lrtllrCI/1 '!J!J,
`ACM, ~811-193.
`Maclclnl•y, J., C11rd, S., and Robon8on, n. (1990). HApkl Controlled
`Movcmllfltlhrough • Vlnurd 3D WorkAJ)tiCr.. CamfJUiff GrtJJJhkl
`14(~, ACM, 171- 176.
`Macklnlay,J., Robonaon, G., and Crud, S. (1990). Mapkl Controlled
`Movement through Vlrt.u•l 31) ~rk8J');Ice.o~. Proc. Cll/ '91, ACM,
`~~~S6.
`MatiU, e., MacKenzie, I. S., and nuxton, W. (1!)C)3), llalf·QWEM'rY1
`A One-Handed Keyboard PacllltJtlng Skill 'J'ran8fer from QWF.HiY.
`Proc. JnJ#Cf/1 '93, ACM, 88-9'1.
`Mlnaky, M. (1985). Manipulating Simulated Objects with Real-World
`GeJturea Using a Porce and Position Senaltlvc Screen. Cumpulllr
`Graphics 18(3), ACM, 195-203.
`Montgomery, E. (1982). Drlnglng Manual Input Into the 20th
`Century. IHP.E Computor 15(3), 11-18. See a lao follow-up letter& In
`the May, june, and October 1982 luuea.
`Newman, W, M. (1968). A Graphical Technique ror Numerical
`Input. CcmtpultngjourmA/11, 63-64.
`Nocman, D., (1981). Categorization of Adlon Slips. Psychology
`R«Mw88 (1), 1-15.
`Nocman, D. and Pl&her, D. (1982). Why Alphabetic Keyboarda Ale
`Not l!aay to Uae: Keyboard Layout Doesn't Much Mauer. Human
`Pac~tm 24(5), 509-519.
`Noyes, J. (1983). The QWER1Y Keyboard: A Review. Jnlmlatlonal
`journal of Man-Machln8 SIUdUis 18, 26~281 .
`Owen, S. (1978). QWERTY Ia Obsolete. Jnuwface Age, January
`1978, 56-59.
`• Pedttsen, E., McCall, K., Moran, T., and Halasz, P. (1993). Tivoli:
`An l!lectronlc Whlteboard for Wornul Workgroup Meetings. Proc.
`lnlerCH/93, ACM, 391-398.
`Pm-Based Computing: 'Jbejournal of Stylus Systems(1995). Stylus
`Publishing, P.O. Box 876, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864-0876. Tel: (208)
`265-5286. e-mail: nlckbarabObix.com.
`Pickering,J. (1986). Touch-Senallive Screerl3: The Technologies and
`Their Application&. lnlmJaltonal journal of Man-Macbln8 Studies
`25(3), 249-269.
`Piurnan,j. A. (1991). Recognizing Handwritten Text. Proc. Cf/1 '9J,
`ACM, 271-275.
`Plamondon, R., Suen, C. Y., and Slmner, M. (Eds.) (1989). Compuler
`Recognition and Human Production of Handwrlli"'J. World
`Scle!tlflc Publishing.
`:~nak, K. (1988), Keys and Keyboards. In Helander (1988),
`94.
`
`::r• R., Berman, M., and Shneiderman, B. (1989). An Experimental
`
`Data \Jallon of Three Touch Screen Strategies withln a Hypertext
`4t-s~· ~/journal of Human-Computer Interaction 1(1),
`
`To u oh, Qoeture, and Marking 48:1.
`
`PtJttcr, R., 8hncldcrman, a., and Weldon, L. (1988). lmprov~g the
`At.turacy of' 'l'ouch Screen&: An Experimental Evaluation of fhree
`lltratt glt&. /'rue. Clll 'lHJ, ACM, 27-32.
`Hoche&Lct, N., lkquacrt, P., and sh:.rp, E. (1978). The Chord
`Keyboard. 11111/J CrnnJJUIM 11(12), 57-63.
`Koomlhal, IJ. S., Michener, J. c., Pfaff, G., Keasener, R., and Sabin,
`M. (1982). Detailed lk:ltlllnlle& of Graphical Input Devlc.eS.
`Compuktr Graphic$ 16(3), ACM, 33--43.
`llubine, D. (W)J). Specifying Geaturea by Example. ~
`GraJihlc$ 25(1), ACM, 327- 337.
`Sach&, P.., Stoop, D. and Robert&, A. (1989). 3-Draw: A Three
`Dimenalonal COmputer Aided Design Tool. PrOCIJBdlngs of the 1989
`1/ifiJ{ lnlmlattonal ConfertnCII on Sysumas, Man and Cybernetics,
`Cambridge, MA, 1194- 1196.
`Schrnandt, C. (1983). Spatlallnput/DI&play Correspondence in a
`Stercr>&copic COmputer Graphic Work Station. Computer Graphics
`17(3), ACM, 253-261.
`Sear&, A., and Shneldernun, B. (1991). High Precision
`Touchweem: Dealgn Strategies and Comparisons with a Mouse.
`lnlmlallonaljournal of Man-MachiWJ Studies 34, 593-613.
`Seibel, R. (1962). A Feasibility Dcmomtration of the Rapid Type
`Data l!ntry Station. Research Report No. RC 845, IBM T. ). Watson
`Research Center.
`Seibel, R. (1972). Data Entry Devices and Procedures. In Van Con,
`H., and Kinkade, R. (l!ru.), Human Englneerl"fJ Guide to
`Equipment Design, Revised Edition, Washington: U.S. Govt. Printing
`orncc, 311-344.
`Sellen, A., Kurtenbach, G., and Buxton, W. (1992). The Prevention
`of Mode Errors through Sensory Feedback. Human Computer
`lnJ4ractlon 7(2), 141- 164.
`Sherr, S. (Ed.) (1988). lnpul Devices. Academic Press.
`Shnc:iderman, B. (1991). Touch Screens Now Offer Compelling
`Uses. IEEE Software ~2), 93-107.
`Shoemake, K. (1992). ARCBALL: A User Interface for Specifying
`Three·Dimeruion21 Orientation Using a Mouse. Proc. Graphics
`Interface '92, Morgan Kaufmann, 151-156.
`Stone, M., Pi5hkin, K., and Bier, E. (1994). The Movable Filter as a
`User Interface Tool. Proc. CHI '94, ACM, 306-312.
`Suen, C. (Ed.) (1990). Frontiers In Handwriting Recognttton:
`Proceedings of the International Workshop on Fronliers In
`f/andwrlltng Recognition, Centre for Pattern Recognition and
`Machine Intelligence, COncordia University, Montreal, Quebec
`Canada H3G 1 MS.
`'
`Tang, J ., and Minnenun, S. 0991a). VideoDraw: A Video lnterl'
`for Collaborative Drawing. ACM Transactions on Information ace
`Sysumu 9(3), 170-184.
`Tang, J., and Minneman, S. 0991b). Videowhiteboard: Video
`Shadows to Support Remote Collaboration. Proc. CHI '9J ACM
`315-322.
`'
`•
`Tesler, L. (1981). The Smalltalk Environment. Byte, August, 90-
`.
`147
`Wallace, V. (1976). The Semantics of Graphical Input Devices.
`Proceedings of the Slggrapb/Sigplan Symposium on Graphical
`Languages, 61~5.
`
`Scanned by CamScanner
`
`

`

`