Re: [-empyre-] Re: semiomorphic..viral



Alan et al,

Yes, all those examples work with the same basic principle as you pointed out - recognising the separation of the data (content) from interface (the representation). Users of a MOO or MUD may have different experiences of the shared space depending on the interface they use to access it. There are of course, numerous debates over the qualities of various GUIs for operating systems.

This is an interface design problem. I am not a CHI person, so do not know of any in depth studies of the pros and cons of particular types of interface or if a classification system or typology has been established. However, I would not be suprised if the CHI community has studied this. As you suggested, what is perhaps more interesting is studying the phenomenological effect of these different representations ie. how the same data (or message) represented in different ways (or morphisms) change the perception / experience of that data.

So, a phenomenological typology of morphisms would be interesting indeed. Actually, in Peter Anders book 'Envisioning Cyberspace' he has some tables that describe spaces and levels of abstraction that might be interesting here?

Troy.

I'm just wondering if there is a typology of such morphisms - for example,
skins for various applications, different mail readers getting the same
info off the spool, different text interfaces for MOOs, MUDs, etc. - the
same for newsgroups - new GUIs for various MOOs, etc. etc. - not to
mention the GUI variations in KDE, Gnome, even OSX. All of these have
different phenomenologies, and more or less the same underlying
information (beyond, say, window managers). There have been numerous
studies of usage in relation to interface - I think what you're describing
is similar? - Alan



On Sat, 25 Oct 2003, Troy Innocent wrote:

Alan and empyrians,

Semiotic morphism was originally developed as a way to translate
between different types of Graphic User Interface design. Different
types of interface design can represent the same information, and this
process can occur automatically via an algorithmic process - the
'content' and the representation are separated.

In Semiomorph (http://iconica.org/artefact/) this idea is applied to an
electronic space which is represented as a third person digital game.
All of the game elements may be represented as either text, diagrams,
icons or simulation (the 'natural' mode of game spaces - realism).


Of course, it may potentially be applied to a wide range of possible
systems - such as those you have described. The key element is that the
system can be described in mathematical / symbolic terms so that it can
be defined in terms of functions, variables etc.


Troy.



One question/comment reading this re: semiotic morphism - what
morphisms?
I'm thinking of morphism say in category theory or the early work of
Julia
Kristeva - one should be able to create and manipulate a semiotics of
such
morphisms - as well as analyze their underlying logic -

- alan


http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm finger sondheim@panix.com _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre


Troy Innocent : troy@iconica.org : iconica.org

_______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre


http://www.asondheim.org/ http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm finger sondheim@panix.com _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre


>>> Troy Innocent : troy@iconica.org : iconica.org





This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.