The depth/breadth trade-off in the design of menu-driven user interfaces
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies
A comparison of hypertext, scrolling and folding as mechanisms for program browsing
Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the British Computer Society on People and computers IV
Conceptual issues in language-based editor design
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies - Special issue on structure-based editors and environments
Are all menus the same? An empirical study
INTERACT '90 Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 Third Interational Conference on Human-Computer Interaction
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In program visualization some form of graphics is used to represent some aspect of a program. However, graphics are necessarily expensive with respect to “screen real estate”. Alternatives, therefore, may be required for presentation of certain concepts fundamental to the programmer's model of a program. For example, one graphical representation of a program, written in a block-structured language like Pascal or Modula-2, is the structure chart model of the hierarchical structure of the blocks or modules making up the program. This graphic may be the most appropriate but it may not be conveniently implemented as a menu and a means of “directly” selecting blocks of program code to view or edit. Such graphics are used extensively, for example, in the Garden environment developed at Brown University. An alternative is a text-based list of block names indented to summarize the program's structure. UQ1, a language-based editor developed at the University of Queensland, implements the concept in this manner. Both types of menu structure were examined and compared for efficiency in a direct manipulation style of interaction. In general, there was no significant difference (P 0.05) in time taken by subjects to select items from either style of menu.