Building Generic User Interfaces in Java Implementation Data Matrix in Java Building Generic User Interfaces

5.3 Building Generic User Interfaces generate, create 2d data matrix barcode none with java projects History of QR Code Standardization code. We probably should gs1 datamatrix barcode for Java have even asked for the country so that our application may be internationalized easily. Finally, we speci ed the temporal context (basically the order that the user should say things) of the expected response.

Each step reduced ambiguity for the user: We narrowed down the things that the user could send to the system as a reasonable and acceptable response. We will discuss various ways of reducing ambiguity, but keep in mind that a good user interface minimizes the amount of ambiguity. This can be done through the use of various types of context, speci c prompts, or other methods.

Reducing ambiguity is particularly important for mobile applications where the users patience and attention span are less than for users of stationary applications. It is also important to reduce ambiguity in a way that can apply to a variety of user interfaces. Each specializing component can add its own set of clarifying content and behavior to the user interface to reduce ambiguity speci c to that particular type of user interface.

For now, the important thing is that any user interface can use natural language interactions. Therefore, to build a generic user interface to the system, our implementation of a generic user interface needs to take into account natural language interactions. In cases that a given natural language-based interaction may be suitable for one user interface and not the others, the alternative must be provided so that the specialization components can select the most optimal choice.

. Mixed Initiative Mixed in itiative, as in the case of natural language, is a terminology typically used in the design of voice user interfaces. However, it too is equally applicable to a variety of user interfaces. Natural language stipulates communication interfaces between humans and computers, and therefore user interface interactions, to be in a way most friendly to humans.

Commands, menus, and forms, in contrast, are examples of discrete information units and messages that are more suitable for the way machines work. Mixed initiative is a marriage, or perhaps a compromise, between the two different models. Whereas humans typically prefer natural language interfaces as they offer the most natural way of communicating, machines like commands and menus better.

In fact, the most ef cient approach is probably a mixture of both. There are many times when the user must be directed (thereby the term directed dialogue or directed interactions) in what response may be suitable. Look at our example of driving directions in the previous section.

If one person tells another person I want to go home, the response of the second person is probably going to be where is home Eventually, an address will be required. So, the user interface is better designed if the user is directed to give the right answer to begin with. Menus and commands can help the user navigate to a point that a natural language response to a prompt can be limited by the machine and yet allows the user to ef ciently communicate with the system.

We will look at mixed-initiative dialogues more carefully in s 7 and 8. Now that we have gone over the basic channels and interactions, lets see how we can model them using UML. Just remember that UML is not a programming.

GENERIC USER INTERFACE DEVELOPMENT metaclass Context metaclass AudioChannel metaclass SimpleInteraction metaclass Interaction metaclass Channel metaclass TextChannel metaclass CompoundInteraction 1 metaclass CompositeChannel (MultiCh servlet gs1 datamatrix barcode annel). metaclass VideoChannel FIGURE 5.5. Metamodel of Interaction Taxonomy. language. It is a modelin Data Matrix barcode for Java g language designed to communicate designs and implementations and to help improve the design and implementation process. Representing Interactions with UML Because we will be using UML to communicate the design and functionality of the user interface, we need to know how interactions between the user and the system can be modeled in UML.

In 4, we reviewed the basics of UML. Now we need to put those basics to work. First, let us use class diagrams to model everything that we have said about the things that make up interactions, the relationship between channels and interactions, and contexts.

Note that the classes in our diagram are all metaclasses. This is because these are not actual classes that a developer would use in creating an application. Rather, they describe the model for the classes in an application.

Such metamodels, as previously discussed in 4, can be used to determine the semantics of a framework that will allow us to implement the functionality that we need or to simply recognize whether a given framework can accommodate the functionality represented by this metamodel. Figure 5.5 shows the metamodel of some of the user interface components discussed to this point.

Class diagrams, though probably the most popular part of UML, do not really give us the functionality that we need to represent user interfaces. Class diagrams are perfect for representing metamodels as shown in Figure 5.5, the metamodels that are the classes for our objects, or class instances.

Use case diagrams can communicate the general use of the system, but they do not have the detail level needed to represent an interaction between the user and the system. Obviously, use case diagrams are still very much needed as any detailed requirement gathering process that utilizes UML involves creation of use case diagrams that map out the general functionality of the system. All of the other.

Copyright © . All rights reserved.