Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!ames!ucsd!nosc!logicon.arpa!trantor.harris-atd.com!melmac!chuck
From: chuck@melmac.harris-atd.com (Chuck Musciano)
Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng
Subject: Menu Interaction Techniques
Message-ID: <2722@trantor.harris-atd.com>
Date: 25 Sep 89 12:01:39 GMT
Sender: news@trantor.harris-atd.com
Reply-To: chuck@trantor.harris-atd.com (Chuck Musciano)
Organization: Advanced Technology Dept., Harris Corp., Melbourne, Fl.
Lines: 30


     I am currently in the midst of a quandary involving two different
menu interaction techniques, and I was wondering if there is anything in the
literature regarding either of the following two hypotheses.

     I have been of the opinion that menus used in an interface should remain
"static": the position and contents of the menu should not change over the
course of using the interface.  I was under the impression that menu usage
becomes an instance of "gesturing" or "stroking" and the cognitive loading
is moved into the "muscle memory" of the user.

     I recently used a system wherein the menu contents constantly changed
based upon the mouse position and the current interface context, including
which interface items are selected.  I found the interface confusing, and said
that it would be hard to learn.  The designers claimed they were using
"progressive disclosure" and that such a system was actually more productive
for the user, since the user only ever saw options which made sense in his
current context.  I contended that each menu usage would require a visual
search and explicit select action, making it harder to use.

     Is there anything in the literature which supports either (or both) of
these claims?  Any thoughts or opinions?

Chuck Musciano				ARPA  : chuck@trantor.harris-atd.com
Harris Corporation 			Usenet: ...!uunet!x102a!trantor!chuck
PO Box 37, MS 3A/1912			AT&T  : (407) 727-6131
Melbourne, FL 32902			FAX   : (407) 727-{5118,5227,4004}

Gee, Beaver, everything that's fun can get you in trouble.  Haven't you
learned that yet? --Gilbert