AUTHOR: Chunyuan Liao, François Guimbretière
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2147783.2147786
ABSTRACT

To combine the affordances of paper and computers, prior research has proposed numerous interactive paper systems that link specific paper document content to digital operations such as multimedia playback and proofreading. Yet, it remains unclear to what degree these systems bridge the inherent gap between paper and computers when compared to existing paper-only and computer-only interfaces. In particular, given the special properties of paper, such as limited dynamic feedback, how well does an average new user learn to master the interactive paper system? What factors affect the user performance? And how does the paper interface work in a typical use scenario?
To answer these questions, we conducted two empirical experiments on a generic pen-gesture-based command system, called PapierCraft [Liao et al. 2008], for paper-based interfaces. With it, people can select sections of printed document and issue commands such as copy and paste, linking and in-text search. The first experiment focused on the user performance of drawing pen gestures on paper. It proves that users can learn the command system in about 30 minutes and achieve a performance comparable to a table PC-based interface supporting the same gestures. The second experiment examined the application of the command system in active reading tasks. The results show promise for seamless integration of paper and computers in active reading for their combined affordances. In addition, our study identifies some key design issues, such as the pen form factor and feedback of gestures. This article contributes to better understanding on pros and cons of paper and computers, and sheds light on the design of future interfaces for document interaction. 

REVIEWER: Muhammad Fariz (G64120075)

Sebelumnya banyak sekali teknologi yang memperkenalkan digital pen seperti Anoto (2002), DigitalDesk (1993), dan PaperPDA (1993). Perkembangan itu mulai membangkitkan interest pada bidang paper-based interface. Mulai dari device yang dapat menangkap coretan, timing, dan bahkan kekuatan tekanan pada pen digital, dan masih banyak lagi. 

Paper ini menjelaskan tentang dua penelitian tentang evaluasi kinerja, yaitu system dengan aplikasi dalam active reading menggunakan PaperCraft dan tugas-tugas yang masih dapat dikerjakan manusia dengan menggunakan paper. Percobaan pertama dilakukan pengujian kinerja secara keseluruhan dari PaperCraft ini menguji kinjera dari gerakan/isyarat yang ditangkap oleh system ini, ‘biaya’ transisi antara inking dan melakukan sebuah command, serta ‘biaya’ memilih parameter dari commands tersebut. Sedangkan dari percobaan kedua, partisipan diminta untuk membandingkan PaperCraft dengan antarmuka dual tablet PC dengan antarmuka yang biasa. 

Antarmuka berbasis paper (paper-based interface) bertujuan untuk memberikan kelebihan dari fungsi digital ke dalam bentuk kertas fisik. Seperti pada DigitalDesk yang keluar pada 1993, sistem ini dapat memberikan kelebihan digital dengan fleksibilitas, tetapi fleksibilitas dari kertas itu sendiri dibatasi dengan konfigurasi perangkat keras yang nonportable, seperti projector dan kamera. Tetapi dewasa ini, biasanya perangkat-perangkan nonportble tersebut telah dikombinasikan dengan pen digital seperti pada Anoto, PenLight, dan MouseLight. 

Penelitian ini menitikberatkan tentang bagaimana pembaca dapat mengandalkan multiple display surface, membaca dan menulis sambilan, serta mengandalkan kelebihan untuk mencari, menjelajah dan mengkolaborasikan dokumen pada kertas. Sedangkan pada PaperCraft sendiri command utama dilakukan dengan menginputkan gerakan/isyarat berbasis pen.

Dari segi interaksi manusia dan komputernya, saat melakukan suatu fungsi/tugas dengan komputer, pengguna membutuhkan feedback untuk memberitahukan pengguna tentang command apa saja yang dapat dilakukan oleh pengguna, mengidentifikasi kesalahan dini, atau juga mendukung sebuah aplikasi dalam melakukan task spesifik seperti mencari keyword. Walaupun feedback tersebut dapat dihasilkan dari display seperti telepon atau paltop, tetapi hal ini akan merumitkan pengguna untuk berganti-ganti antara pen dan display-nya. Sehingga diajukanlah pen-top multimodal feedback based degan kebihan feedback berdasarkan visual, tactility (sentuhan) dan auditory. 

Biasanya pada active reading, pengguna sering meninggalkan bacaan, melakukan anotasi, dan mengubah dokumen. Seperti dalam melakukan pencarian, atau membuat konten baru. Dengan meninggalkan pekerjaan/task yang sedang dilakukan tersebut didapatlah lima step cycle, yaitu: 

  1. Annotation
  2. Mengganti pen menjadi command mode
  3. Menggambar command
  4. Mengganti pen kembali ke annotation mode
  5. Melanjutkan annotation.


AUTHOR: Chunyuan Liao, François Guimbretière
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2147783.2147786
ABSTRACT
To combine the affordances of paper and computers, prior research has proposed numerous interactive paper systems that link specific paper document content to digital operations such as multimedia playback and proofreading. Yet, it remains unclear to what degree these systems bridge the inherent gap between paper and computers when compared to existing paper-only and computer-only interfaces. In particular, given the special properties of paper, such as limited dynamic feedback, how well does an average new user learn to master the interactive paper system? What factors affect the user performance? And how does the paper interface work in a typical use scenario?
To answer these questions, we conducted two empirical experiments on a generic pen-gesture-based command system, called PapierCraft [Liao et al. 2008], for paper-based interfaces. With it, people can select sections of printed document and issue commands such as copy and paste, linking and in-text search. The first experiment focused on the user performance of drawing pen gestures on paper. It proves that users can learn the command system in about 30 minutes and achieve a performance comparable to a table PC-based interface supporting the same gestures. The second experiment examined the application of the command system in active reading tasks. The results show promise for seamless integration of paper and computers in active reading for their combined affordances. In addition, our study identifies some key design issues, such as the pen form factor and feedback of gestures. This article contributes to better understanding on pros and cons of paper and computers, and sheds light on the design of future interfaces for document interaction.
REVIEWER: Muhammad Fariz (G64120075)
Sebelumnya banyak sekali teknologi yang memperkenalkan digital pen seperti Anoto (2002), DigitalDesk (1993), dan PaperPDA (1993). Perkembangan itu mulai membangkitkan interest pada bidang paper-based interface. Mulai dari device yang dapat menangkap coretan, timing, dan bahkan kekuatan tekanan pada pen digital, dan masih banyak lagi.
Paper ini menjelaskan tentang dua penelitian tentang evaluasi kinerja, yaitu system dengan aplikasi dalam active reading menggunakan PaperCraft dan tugas-tugas yang masih dapat dikerjakan manusia dengan menggunakan paper. Percobaan pertama dilakukan pengujian kinerja secara keseluruhan dari PaperCraft ini menguji kinjera dari gerakan/isyarat yang ditangkap oleh system ini, ‘biaya’ transisi antara inking dan melakukan sebuah command, serta ‘biaya’ memilih parameter dari commands tersebut. Sedangkan dari percobaan kedua, partisipan diminta untuk membandingkan PaperCraft dengan antarmuka dual tablet PC dengan antarmuka yang biasa.
Antarmuka berbasis paper (paper-based interface) bertujuan untuk memberikan kelebihan dari fungsi digital ke dalam bentuk kertas fisik. Seperti pada DigitalDesk yang keluar pada 1993, sistem ini dapat memberikan kelebihan digital dengan fleksibilitas, tetapi fleksibilitas dari kertas itu sendiri dibatasi dengan konfigurasi perangkat keras yang nonportable, seperti projector dan kamera. Tetapi dewasa ini, biasanya perangkat-perangkan nonportble tersebut telah dikombinasikan dengan pen digital seperti pada Anoto, PenLighht, dan MouseLight.
Penelitian ini menitikberatkan tentang bagaimana pembaca dapat mengandalkan multiple display surface, membaca dan menulis sambilan, serta mengandalkan kelebihan untuk mencari, menjelajah dan mengkolaborasikan dokumen pada kertas. Sedangkan pada PaperCraft sendiri command utama dilakukan dengan menginputkan gerakan/isyarat berbasis pen.
Dari segi interaksi manusia dan komputernya, saat melakukan suatu fungsi/tugas dengan komputer, pengguna membutuhkan feedback untuk memberitahukan pengguna tentang command apa saja yang dapat dilakukan oleh pengguna, mengidentifikasi kesalahan dini, atau juga mendukung sebuah aplikasi dalam melakukan task spesifik seperti mencari keyword. Walaupun feedback tersebut dapat dihasilkan dari display seperti telepon atau paltop, tetapi hal ini akan merumitkan pengguna untuk berganti-ganti antara pen dan display-nya. Sehingga diajukanlah pen-top multimodal feedback based degan kebihan feedback berdasarkan visual, tactility (sentuhan) dan auditory.
Biasanya pada active reading, pengguna sering meninggalkan bacaan, melakukan anotasi, dan mengubah dokumen. Seperti dalam melakukan pencarian, atau membuat konten baru. Dengan meninggalkan pekerjaan/task yang sedang dilakukan tersebut didapatlah lima step cycle, yaitu: 1. Annotation, 2. Mengganti pen menjadi command mode, 3. Menggambar command, 4. Mengganti pen kembali ke annotation mode, 5. Melanjutkan annotation.

Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors

"Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution."

The truth is, I'm not really sure it is a problem, but I'll act as it is.

Remember this one?


Pict 1. The alert
Well as you know they use the wrong grammar that i've just noticed it now! wow!!
It should be written as "Destination route must be chosen" not "choose" and for 
Recommendation: Change it!
Severiy Rating 1/4

2. Field Cannot Use some search

the next problem is this one. I know that it should be written in Flexibility and efficiency of use but this is about time we're talking about.
Pict 2. The filght search form
Users have to select destination and arrival route by the list when the site should provide some search box with suggestion for not choosing the route too long because it's in list.

Recommendation: Use datalist instead so users are given more that just one option about how to select routes.

Severity Rating 2/4


Thanks. it will be published soon

thanks for connection, Akim and Fachry :***

Match between system and the real world means that:

The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order. 

Okay, let's cut to the point. In this section of post I'll be giving one problem in sriwijaya site.

1. Sitemap are ordered in non-logical order

The site should display the sitemap in logical order, but this one doesn't. Just take a look

Pict 1. The sitemap

You can see that it's not really logic to visualize the sitemap because of the term they use (Main and Primary) by using list.

Recommendation: Use brainmap-like sitemap instead to visualize it.
Severity Rating 1/4. Because most people rarely explore sitemaps :')

Thank You

Error prevention

"Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action."

A good systems, applications, or websites should consider to use this guidelines, by preventing user from error, rather than fixing the error (even though fixing these problem is also necessary) because what? People are scared with error.

Sriwijayaair.co.id has many of them, but in order to keep my time efficient, I'll be giving you two of them and it's basically from wrong style of designing the website.

1. Search button are always enabled.

You can still search for a flight schedule without inputting the destination and arrival route and system will give you alert about the mistake you've just made. It's frustrating, because I am alerted and we would likely wondering what we're doing it wrong :')


Pict 1. Clickable search button
And you'll be given some of this...
Pict 2. The alert that shows
Recommendation: Disable the search button when user haven't inputted the destination and arrival route.

It's kinda disaster, and it's 4/4 for Severity Rating from me. fix, bay, fix!

2. Searching Office does't really search

When you want to look for this airline office, you can simply click the Office link below the site and you'l' be directed to Office site. But here our problem comes.

When you apply some filter region like this...

Pict 3. Filtering region by Jakarta area
First thing you'll notice, it doesn't give you a processing throbber which kinda against the rule of Visibility and System Status. Then you'll be given some information about the airline office located in Jakarta region. but... when I apply the filter like this...

Pict 4. Jakarta with Denpasar as the city
The system actually are in error state, because Denpasar is located in Bali instead of Jakarta. Heck! the system even couldn't inform us what we're doing wrong.

Recommendation: Give the error, for better result, just change the select option type with field and improved by adding area suggestion

Severity Rating? 4/4

Thanks. Winter Deadline is coming.

Consistency and Standards

"Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions."

One of main guidelines that must be followed in designing user interface is consistency. This one will guide us to build user mental in understanding how the system works. It's implemented by using standards which are defined first from the very beginning.

Back to sriwijayaair.co.id. There are some of inconsistencies in their site sections.

Here's some of them...

1. Link and not link are displayed as same type of image in the same section

People will mostly click on the logo banks and "Berita" title on the left and the right side of this picture and expect to open a new page about it. But the truth is, these are only images, not clickable and definitely placed on a wrong place.

Pict 1. Links and Not links are just the same 

Recommendation: Separate the image from clickable image.
It's 1/4 for Severity Rating. Better keep an eye from what you code, dev!. 

2. Indonesian in English menu

Honestly, I'm bored to evaluate the News section over again, but this one should be noticed by developer. As for you know, I'm using English as the site language, but I found some of the texts are still using Indonesian. Take a look at this one.

Pict 2. There's still Indonesian in english 

Recommendation: Change "Berita" to "News". It's just as simple as that, dude.
Severity Rating? Well it's 1/4

Those two problems are found on this website. If somehow you, the CEO, or manager, or even developer of this site, please give it a time to fix these.

Thank you for reading the second post of Heuristic Evaluation :)

Visibility of System Status


"The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time."

The first thing that’ll be evaluated is this subject. On websites, visibility will keep users stay informed about where they are in relation to other pages on the site. This allows them to have a mental map of the site and easily navigate both to new pages and ones visited previously.

Sriwijaya.co.id has many mistakes in this area, and I’ll tell ya some of it.

1. Website title on every page is always same.

Every webpage has its own title, and titles are used to keep us informed about what pages we are viewing. Let say that I’d like to open a website pages in many tab for each pages and I unconsciously open so many tabs, then this so called title here are there for me to distinguish pages that I want to view next. But this feature is not applicable in this site because every title on each page is always the same: Sriwijaya Air. And it's bad ):

Pict 1. Same webpages title, bad bad bad girl!

Recommendation: Change the title in every pages to match with its content

And for this mistake, I will give 2/4 for Severity Rating. For me, it's a minor problem, because I believe not everyone wants to find or book a flight ticket from the airline main site.


2. Home in navbar is always active

One of the similar problem on this site is the highlighted navbar to show what page are being viewed. In this site, every page you open will inform you that you are in "Home" of the site. You can check it below, y'all!



Pict 2. Homepage
Pict 3. About us page
Pict 4. The Contact us page

Recommendation: Change the active navbar on every page to its current page.

It's even a worse mistake. For me, it's 3/4 for Severity Rating

p.s I kinda hate the stewardess' smile (it's creepy), so the cropping area on picture 4 is on purpose.



3. News section doesn't tell you when there's nothing to show

Not really a problem, but by seeing this section, at least the site should tell us that there's no news. By leaving it blank, it may distract some visitors, like me huehuehue.


Pict 6. Uninforming news section
Recommendation: Display a message such as "No news to show" or vice versa.

As I already said before, it's not really a problem that need to be fixed immediately or be given high priority, so it's 1/4 for Severity Rating

Okay uh, that was one of my long post and it really gave me a hard time to think. Don't judge my evaluation because I honestly didn't really think it that way. Und danke, Leute!!

For those who would want to know what Severity Rating is, you can look up for more info from the old man Jenkins Nielsen's webpage: Severity Rating for Usability Problem
Ciao Bella! Willkommen back to my Secret Recipes. I know it has been so long since the last post und this post is also about course stuff, so it wouldn't be a long post even it's actually a long one.Okay, let's get it started.


In this post, I will be doing a heuristic evaluation on Sriwijaya Air main website. For you guys who doesn't know what this site is about, yeah, well, It is about main site of one of Indonesian airline which based in Jakarta. You can book a flight ticket, and get some promotion info, and basically, anything about this airline company will be written on this site.
The company logo

Und, what is this so.. called Heuristic Evaluation?

Heuristic Evaluation (HE) is an inspection technique, not unlike doing a code review to find
bugs in software, but it is a bunch of rules that distill out the principles of effective user interfaces. This technique was invented by Jakon Nielsen.

There are 10 guidelines in this technique, and hier it is based on the old man's website

1. Visibility of system status
The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time.

2. Match between system and the real world
The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order.

3. User control and freedom
Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo.

4. Consistency and standards
Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions.

5. Error prevention
Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Either eliminate error-prone conditions or check for them and present users with a confirmation option before they commit to the action.

6. Recognition rather than recall
Minimize the user's memory load by making objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrievable whenever appropriate.

7. Flexibility and efficiency of use
Accelerators -- unseen by the novice user -- may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions.

8. Aesthetic and minimalist design
Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility.

9. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors
Error messages should be expressed in plain language (no codes), precisely indicate the problem, and constructively suggest a solution.

10. Help and documentation
Even though it is better if the system can be used without documentation, it may be necessary to provide help and documentation. Any such information should be easy to search, focused on the user's task, list concrete steps to be carried out, and not be too large.

And for my test subject, sriwijayaair.co.id, I will only be using 5 of them to evaluate it. You can read the full post on these links below :
1. Visibility of System Status of sriwijayaair.co.id
2. Consistency and Standards of sriwijayaair.co.id 
3. Error Prevention of sriwijayaair.co.id
4. Match Between System and Real World of sriwijayaair.co.id
5. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors of sriwijayaair.co.id