This articles categorization of interactions is interesting and generally makes sense. As I was reading the article i would think of visualizations I have come across and most interactions would fall into one of the categories presented. One question I have (and this may come from my lack of a research background) is what is the final purpose for these categorizations? Could it lead to some sort of method for evaluating infovis interactions? It talks about it leading to a 'science of interaction', but what does that technically mean?
I did enjoy reading the paper on interaction more than I had thought. I had not realized that most of the papers (and most of the papers I have read so far) deal more with representation than interaction. Breaking it down in this way makes sense, I had just not thought about it. I feel like the authors could have gone further with details about what the purpose of these categories were, but overall I enjoyed the read.
0 comments:
Post a Comment