3 Kai’s Interface Language
3.1 Unfolding functionality
Interface widgets become visible on demand. KPT Convolver has three modes: Explore, Design and Tweak. The controls that are not used for a specific mode are dimmed. (Fig. 4 KPT Convolver)
Pro
A rearrangement of widgets on mode changes is not necessary. The view remains familiar.
The user becomes curious to explore the interface.
Everything is accessible at once, because the mode changes if one clicks onto a faded item.
3.2 MouseOver
Tools fade out if they are not in use. If the mouse cursor is moved over these items they wake up. All the tools to the right and below the main view in the Bryce interface are normally invisible (Fig. 5 Bryce 2). Thefilm strip, the camera and all other elements on the border of the GOO room increase in contrast if the mouse moves over (Fig. 6 Kai’s Power GOO).
Interface widgets get an explanation if the mouse gets moved over these items. (KPT, Bryce, Poser)
Pro
The view gets focused to the task. Distracting items are out of sight.
The Cockpit problem gets solved, because one can handle the numerous controls in larger chunks.
The user becomes curious to explore the interface.
Better spatial arrangement of widgets, because the label is omitted. (Bryce’ toolbar)
3.3 MouseDragging instead of Value-Slider
Classical sliders and scrollbars use a thumb, that can be dragged to a specific value. KPT3 or KPT Convolver use simple orbs that serve as origin of a mouse drag action. (e.g. Hue, Saturation, etc. in Fig. 2 KPT Texture Explorer 3.0)
Pro
An orb and a referring label is less space consuming than a value slider.
Kai’s sliders provide real time feedback for the edited object, because the control does not display any feedback by itself.
The value space can be 2-dimensional, because the x- and y-direction can have a different meaning
Cons
It is very difficult to enter exact numerical values.
The control displays no feedback about the selected value.
3.4 Memory Dots / Five Favorites
KPT Spheroid Designer, KPT Convolver and KPT5 use 3x3 fields of memory dots. These dots can store different settings of other interface widgets. Soap and Show usefive dots for the same task.
Pro
The user can customize tools, store control values and can flip between different interface arrangements.
The access time is very short.
Cons
Memory Dots provide no visual feedback. One has to activate the dot to recognize its content. An icon or MouseOver-Preview might be helpful. Thefilm strip at GOO provides such feedback already.
3.5 Transparency & Shadows (KPT Lens f/x, Poser)
Nearly every item in Kai’s interfaces drops a smooth shadow. This is part of the kansei attitude of building harmonic environments.
Modal dialog windows from GOO, the menus from Show and the information palette from Soap are translucent.
Pro
The object underneath the pane remains visible.
3.6 Full Screen Mode, Rooms Metaphor
Pro
Design in every respect – Kansei Design
Special suited environments for special tasks support that task perfectly.
No window clutter
Cons
Only one room at a time can be active.
There is hardly any interaction with other programs. They are not visible; therefore drag and drop is not possible. One is no longer aware of other “rooms” on the machine.
3.7 Workspace – Desktop
GOO has only a gallery in a grid for images. Soap and Show (Fig. 10 The Sort-Room of Kai’s Power SHOW) use a more drawn out version of a desktop to display collections of mediafiles.
Pro
Better implementation of a real life desktop.
Previews are very useful to recognize imagefiles.
Cons
Very limited for hierarchical structures
Arrangements cannot be stored for later use.
3.8 MetaWindow
Windows without classical borders and handles (Poser3)
Drawers, that reveal assets or functionalities on demand (Soap, Poser3)
Scrapbooks, that store objects (Soap)
Pro
This is an obvious way to get a hierarchical level into the interface.
Things, that are not needed every time, are only two clicks away.
Feedback – please leave a message
hci.social/@mprove or norden.social/@chronohh
mprove@acm.org
- More channels
