Xref: utzoo alt.hypertext:827 comp.cog-eng:1933 comp.graphics:17091 comp.multimedia:296
Newsgroups: alt.hypertext,comp.cog-eng,comp.graphics,comp.multimedia
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!drraymond
From: drraymond@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Darrell Raymond)
Subject: Re: Images vs. Text
Message-ID: <1991Apr6.163454.2454@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <10292@pitt.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 16:34:54 GMT
Lines: 34

In article <10292@pitt.UUCP>, grefen@sun14.cs.pitt.edu (Gregory Grefenstette) writes:
> 
> I'm doing work on hypertext visual interfaces and I
> would like to be able to prove what seems evident to me,
> that is,  that people can scan information presented
> in a visual image-based form FASTER than in a plain
> textual form.

  Before you show that pictures are faster or better than text, it might be 
wise to consider if you even know what the line of demarcation is between the 
two.  I wouldn't hope to find a definitive answer anytime soon, mind you; 
this problem been a topic of intense debate for philosophers, art historians,
psychologists, and students of literature for many years.  However, considering
it will be a reasonable way to sharpen your own notions.

  If you want to learn something about the topic, rather than simply look
for evidence supporting your preconceptions, I suggest you start with Nelson 
Goodman's "Languages of Art".  Essentially, Goodman divides languages into 
notational and analog classes.  Notational languages are systems of discrete 
symbols with discrete referents - programming languages, for instance.  Analog 
languages are systems of dense symbols with dense referents - like paintings.
Analog languages use symbol systems in which all differences matter (i.e.,
brushstrokes) to express domains in which all differences matter (i.e., 
emotion).  The notation/analog distinction has several advantages over the 
less precise and more subjective terms "picture" and "text".

  I've just completed a paper proposing the use of Goodman's notions for
evaluating visual programming languages, entitled "Characterizing Visual
Notations" (sumitted to the IEEE workshop on visual languages).  I'm willing 
to send a draft copy to people who are interested in reading more about 
Goodman.

-Darrell Raymond
drraymond@daisy.uwaterloo.ca