Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!apple!motcsd!hpda!hpdslab!hp-ptp!garye
From: garye@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Gary_Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng
Subject: Re: "Cognitive queueing" (was: Typing versus Handwriting)
Message-ID: <1440002@hp-ptp.HP.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 89 16:41:23 GMT
References: <1440001@hp-ptp.HP.COM>
Organization: HP Pacific Technology Park - Sunnyvale, Ca.
Lines: 113

There have been a lot of good responses here.  Since I was the original poster,
let me trim this down a bit by being more specific about what I want to ask.  

I am thinking about a handheld unit - something either notebook size (8"x11"
and very thin like 1") or half-notebook size (8"x5" and maybe 2" thick) or
large calculator size (like the Sharp Wizard).  I envision using it while
holding it in the air with one hand, or resting it on something while balancing
it with one hand (on your knee, against the wall, etc.) - basically, you use it
with one hand in environments where you probably can't find enough horizontal 
space to lay it down flat.

With that in mind, there are two issues, and I am wondering if there are any
specific studies that address these:

--------
A) General efficiency of handwriting versus typing.

Gary L. Newell:
>  Of course, if you intend a user population which is unfamiliar with or
> simply not very good using keyboards - then I guess that it might be
> usefull - say for inventory updates on the warehouse floor or the
> factory floor (something hand held...).

Pretty much what I had in mind.  In this kind of environment, I would think
handwriting would be less frustrating then typing.

Donald A. Norman: 
> 2. If the device is hand held, so that one hand is occupied supporting
> the device and only one hand is available for input, for a large class
> of people, handwriting is faster than typing.

I agree.  I do believe that the "class" is "large", meaning we're missing a big
chunk of people with typing-only interfaces.

--------
B) Handwriting vs. typing for non-text-intensive applications.

Gary L. Newell:
> Single gestures can indicate target, scope, and action for many commands
> in applications like editting - much better than most keyboard designs.

and Lambert Meerteens:
> Keyboard entry condemns us to stay
> bound to a small set of symbols, which may be OK for some applications, but
> which blocks development in many areas: engineering, mathematics, chemistry.

and Thom Gillespie:
> The one thing which 'writing' allows which 'typing' doesn't is the ability to
> express ideas without words - with pictures, jottings, diagrams. 
> Text I'd rather 'type', ideas I'd rather 'express'. 

and Gary L. Newell again:
> ...a stylus/tablet interface
> is simply a very poor idea for applications with a large percentage of text
> entry. Editting, spreadsheets, some formula writing, are better applications
> for these systems.

This is a big point for me.  My original question only dealt with efficiency,
but the broader idea in the back of my mind is that more and more computer
interfacing is getting less and less text-intensive.  Line-mode commands are
being replaced with point-and-shoot, and more tools used for designing or
"thinking" (idea organizers, outliners) are more graphics-oriented than pure
text.  A personal example: When I take notes, I don't use a lot of pictures
(some), but I do use the physical relationship between pieces of text to carry
information.  I may group similar ideas together in one corner or use columns
or rows, and I always use indentation to show outlines and structure.  This is
a real pain in the neck with just a keyboard, but is very easy with a pen and
paper.  I have tried typing notes into the computer while I'm talking on the
phone (and I'm a pretty fast touch-typist), but I've given up in frustration
because I can put down more information more quickly using spatial
relationships with pen and paper.

True, there are some applications that make more sense with a keyboard, such as
word processing.  But once the text is entered, editing that text involves 
jumping around the page changing things, and this implies (to me) that a 
gestural interface is more efficient or at least more intuitive (of course mass
changes, "change all Gery to Gary" are probably still best handled as 
line-oriented commands).

--------
And the practical, bottom line:

Donald A. Norman:
> Typing versus handwriting:  why the "versus," why not "along with"

The best situation, I agree, is to include both.  Microwriter's handheld Agenda
includes a regular set of alpha keys along with their 5-key chord layout so
that the user can pick which one he/she wants to use.  

> What do I conclude?  That each input device has its place.  
> Moreover, I suspect that any individual would switch back and forth, 
> depending upon circumstances and the nature of the input material.

I definitely agree.  

> BUT, if you are going to include a keyboard:
> 
> 1. Make it full size (it can fold up to a small size, but it should
> unfold to full size)

I haven't been able to figure out how to do this.  I picture a flat, membrane
keyboard (with no tactile feedback) that rolls up or folds up and has trouble
lying flat on the table when you want to type.  Yuk!  But, I'm not a mechanical
engineer...

One of my conclusions is this: I think we computer people have been so
keyboard-bound that we've been blind to how useful a stylus interface could be 
and in how many applications it would really shine.  I think that after we've
started using an interface like that we'll start thinking up new ways to
approach problems when we're no longer bound to text-only input.

Gary Ericson - Hewlett-Packard, Workstation Technology Division
               phone: (408)746-5098  mailstop: 101N  email: gary@hpdsla9.hp.com