Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site ulysses.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5g!hou5h!eagle!mhuxi!mhuxj!mhuxl!achilles!ulysses!kpv
From: kpv@ulysses.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.cog-eng
Subject: Menus, forms, commands etc.
Message-ID: <611@ulysses.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 17-Sep-83 14:34:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: ulysses.611
Posted: Sat Sep 17 14:34:14 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Sep-83 11:33:45 EDT
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 26

After lots of flame and a few good articles, it seems that this newsgroup
has gone to sleep - at least I haven't seen any new article for a week now.
Let me raise the hibernators and ask a few questions:

	1. Has anyone done hard/scientific studies on what are the trade-offs
	   among pure menu, pure command or hybrid systems? What are the
	   underlying parameters that cause one mode of communication to be
	   preferred to another?
	   For example, a large part of the world is still constrained to low
	   bauds communication. As a result, the verbosity of a menu-oriented
	   system can cause it to be a nuisance. On the other hand, the ZOG
	   system at Carnegie-Mellon claims some success with very high-speed
	   communication line with touch-sensitive screens and all.

	2. What about your experiences with systems combining menu, command,
	   form-filling and so on?
	   I've developed a prototype language and an interpreter for building
	   systems with these characteristics as interface to other UN*X tools.
	   Initial reactions from users are very positive.

	3. What about your experiences concerning graphical communication,
	   SmallTalk style or otherwise?

If there are enough interesting responses, I'll summarize to the net.

	Phong Vo, 201-582-4869, {penelope, ulysses}!kpv