Ken
Nagasako
ICS
463 ALN
January
27, 2003
In-Class Activity #2: Conceptualizing
Interaction
Part
(a):
Conceptual
model of a personal pocket-sized calendar:
The conceptual model
for a pocket-sized calendar is based on the activities of manipulating and browsing.
The manipulation is based on the user manually writing in entries for daily
activities/appointments on the pages of the calendar itself. The user also
³browses² through the pocket-sized calendar by flipping pages until they reach
the desired day or week.
The conceptual model for a pocket-sized calendar is
also based on the physical object of a book. The calendar has pages, as a book
does.
The metaphor used for a
pocket-sized calendar is that of a day represented as a ³compartment². On each
page, a week is shown as seven days, each day with its own separate space on
the page. The user of the calendar can then enter appointments or activities
for each day in the appropriate space.
Based on asking a few
of my friends, the conceptual model of the pocket-sized calendar seems to fit
their needs, as well as the manner in which they use them. The conceptual model
in this case intends for the user to keep track of their daily activities by
entering them in day-by-day and viewing them in the same way. This is the way
that the people I asked use this type of calendar.
Conceptual
model of a wall calendar:
The conceptual model
for a wall calendar is similar to that of a pocket-sized calendar. It is based
on the activities of manipulating and browsing, just as the pocket-sized
calendar is. Users can still manipulate the wall calendar by entering in
appointments or activities in the block allotted to each day. They can browse
through the calendar by flipping from month to month. However, the emphasis for
a wall calendar is more on browsing rather than manipulating (when compared to
a pocket-sized calendar). This is because there is less space to enter daily
activities, since there is only a small block for each day. Also, having one
month per page makes it easier to view and plan one¹s schedule over a long term
(browsing).
The metaphor for a wall
calendar is of a month represented as a whole made up of individual parts
(days). The month is shown as a whole on one page, but at the same time is
subdivided into days, each with its own block.
Again through the
feedback of a few friends, the wall calendar seems to fit users needs. The
conceptual model works in this case, as users write major activities on the
calendar on the appropriate day, and browse the calendar to get a larger sense
of what their schedule is like.
Conceptual
model of a wall planner:
The conceptual model of
a wall planner is based almost solely on exploring/browsing. There is virtually
no space to write in daily activities or appointments, making the wall planner
primarily useful for long-term planning. This differs from pocket-sized or wall
calendars, which users can manipulate by writing in activities.
The main metaphor for a
wall planner is of a year represented as a whole. The entire year is shown on a
single large ³page² without subdivisions into ³blocks².
The conceptual model of
wall planners limits their use, which is reflected in the feedback I received.
Users seem to have much less use for wall planners due to the lack of space for
writing in appointments. However, the conceptual model does fit the primary way
people do use wall planners, as a long-range planning tool.
Part
(b):
Conceptual
model of an electronic personal calendar:
The conceptual model in
this case is based on manipulation and browsing, as is a pocket-sized calendar.
The difference is in the manner in which the manipulation and browsing is done.
On a pocket calendar, users enter in appointments using a pen or pencil on
paper. For the electronic calendar, users enter in appointments via a keyboard
or a stylus on a screen. Users browse through a pocket calendar by flipping
pages; browsing through an electronic calendar is accomplished by pressing or
clicking on virtual ³buttons² to change virtual ³pages².
Electronic calendars
have increased functionality. There is greater capacity to add activities or
notes for each day, whereas physical calendars have a limited physical space in
which to write. There is also the ability to add alerts or alarms to each day.
A common interface
metaphor is a button which is displayed onscreen as a button. Interface
metaphors such as this are not well integrated, because traditional calendars
do not have buttons.
Electronic calendars
are more difficult to use than physical calendars because of the interface.
There may be more than one step to do something as simple as entering in an
appointment for an electronic calendar. In comparison, a physical calendar only
requires one step: the user writes in the appointment in the appropriate day
with a pen or pencil. Users are also accustomed to physical calendars; using an
electronic calendar requires learning a new interface which is often not well
integrated.