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