Comment Location:
http://christalks624.blogspot.com/2010/09/youre-doing-it-wrong.html
Summary:
The author created Quill as his primary contribution. Quill is very similar to Rubine's GRANDMA save that Quill does not include the time-based features of Rubine and adds some new elements. Quill is a GUI that has the user/designer train the program to recognize a particular gesture type through repitition; the program provides "active feedback" to prevent a first-time user from getting lost. The paper devoted more time to explaining the features of the program rather than the programming that created it (such as the feature set and particulars about the linear classifier).
A large section of the paper was devoted towards the difficulties involved in optimizing the active feedback. The author mentioned the key problems were the timing of advice, amount of advice, and advice content. The problems centered around not offending the user and still giving advice the user deemed helpful. The author also wrote on background analysis and explained the reasoning behind his choices. Lastly, the author mentioned his prediction system was not perfect and sometimes incorrect advice was given.
Discussion:
Quill is an improvement upon Rubine's GRANDMA in terms of considering the user. The author tried to consider multiple situations when adjusting the active feedback so the user would actually use the advice instead of ignoring the advice. The author's choice of the background analysis method was to prevent user confusion. I have found it somewhat rare for a program in a scientific paper to consider the user so heavily.
I found the background analysis section to be extraneous. There should a paper explaining how to optimize background analysis per given situation. I believe that space in the paper could have been better spent on something else; it was certainly worth mentioning, but I feel the author should have either elaborated on the subject or been more brief.
I agree with the fact that the paper is too much focused on the experience of the user and their own experience as they where in the development stage. I do no think that this is irrelevant, but considering that this is a short paper, many more important things are left without mentioning or with very short detail.
ReplyDelete