syllabus‎ > ‎R: Interaction‎ > ‎

Mokeresete-Kriz-Motlhala

INTERACTION
I think what the writer said is true that interaction is as important as representation though there is not so much research done on interaction as compared to interaction. .
There is no way interaction can be divorced from representation.

Interaction in the context of InfoVis is more on users of the InfoVis system getting information from the system than them (user) feeding the system with information.


Categories

Categorization of techniques was done basing on the intent, what the user want to achieve in performing performing the interaction.
  1. Select
  2. Explore
  3. Reconfigure
  4. Encode
  5. Abstract/Elaborate
  6. Filter
  7. Connect
Conclusion
It is difficult to create categories of interaction techniques that are clear and comprehensive. What does this mean because I think the way they have categorized them in this article is clear? OR this is the answer: "The categories we proposed are based on our own perspective on interaction in Infovis and, thus, inherently debatable."

Some techniques are difficult to classify and do not quite fit into any one of the categories. I don't know how true is that?

Compare category was not included because is implicit in other categories, and I agree.
Comments