Title: Task composition method for computer applications
Abstract: Jigsaw connector pieces representing tasks to be performed are displayed on a computer screen, preferably hierarchically in a tree, to elucidate the relationships between tasks. To perform a task, a user positions an attachment jigsaw piece next to its corresponding connector piece. The user is then prompted to input or verify preferences in a properties panel. For example, a printer may be installed by interconnecting an attachment piece (corresponding to the printer to be installed) next to the printer connector piece in the tree. The user may be aided in the process of matching connector and attachment pieces through the use of matching colors and images on the pieces.
Patent Number: 6,892,361 Issued on 05/10/2005 to Kandogan
| Inventors:
|
Kandogan; Eser (Mountain View, CA)
|
| Assignee:
|
International Business Machines Corporation (Armonk, NY)
|
| Appl. No.:
|
900734 |
| Filed:
|
July 6, 2001 |
| Current U.S. Class: |
715/837; 715/764; 715/835; 715/853; 715/966; 715/967 |
| Intern'l Class: |
G09G 005/00 |
| Field of Search: |
345/837,853,771,763,835,967,781,839
|
References Cited [Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Other References
R. C. Bodner et al., "Using Animated Icons to Present Complex Tasks," Proceedings
of CASCON, 1997, pp. 281-291.
J. G. Bonar et al., "A Visual Programming Language for Novices." In S.-K. Chang
(Ed.), Principles of Visual Programming Systems, Prentice Hall, 326-366 (1990).
E. P. Glinert, "Out of Flatland: Towards 3-D Visual Programming." In Visual Programming
Environments: Applications and Issues, IEEE Computer Society Press, 547-554 (1990).
J. A. Johnson et al., "The Desktop Metaphor as an Approach to User Interface
Design," Proc. ACM Annual Conference on the Range of Computing, 1985, pp. 548-549.
R. Mander et al., "A ‘Pile’ Metaphor for Supporting Casual Organization
of Information," Proc. ACM SIGCHI, 1992, pp. 627-634.
B. Shneiderman, "Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer-Interaction,
3rd Edition, Chapter 6, Direct Manipulation and Virtual Environments,"
pp. 184-233, 1998.
J. M. Spool et al., "Designing for Complex Products," Proc. ACM SIGCHI, Tutorials,
1995, pp. 395-439.
"Access/Control Icons (Icon Keys)," IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, Apr. 1995,
pp. 407-410.
|
Primary Examiner: Nguyen; Cao (Kevin)
Assistant Examiner: Roswell; Michael
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Johnson; Daniel E.
Claims
1. A method of performing a task in a processor-based system that includes a
monitor and a user input device for controlling information displayed on the monitor,
the method comprising:
displaying on the monitor a plurality of connector pieces representing respective
tasks to be completed, the pieces arranged in a tree reflecting a hierarchy of
tasks, wherein each of the connector pieces has a shape that i) corresponds to
a type of task, and that ii) is different from the shape of connector pieces corresponding
to a different type of task;
displaying a plurality of attachment pieces on the monitor, each of the attachment
pieces being configured to interconnect with at least one of the connector pieces,
wherein each of the attachment pieces has a shape that corresponds to a type of
task, such that when the shape of a given connector piece matches the shape of
a given attachment piece, then the given attachment piece corresponds to a way
of completing the task represented by the given connector piece;
using the user input device so that one of the attachment pieces and one of the
connector pieces are positioned in close proximity with each other on the monitor,
said one attachment piece and said one connector piece having matching shapes that
correspond to a particular task selected by a user to be completed, said proximity
positioning indicating a desire on the part of a user to complete the particular
task; and
inputting into the processor information necessary to perform the particular
task, wherein the user is prompted for said information following said positioning.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said positioning results in said one of the
attachment pieces and said one of the connector pieces appearing interconnected.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said inputting includes confirming default
settings from the processor.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the attachment pieces and said
one of the connector pieces have matching colors prior to said proximity positioning,
to aid the user in matching said one of the attachment pieces and said one of the
connector pieces.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the attachment pieces and said
one of the connector pieces have respective contours that substantially match when
they are interconnected.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the attachment pieces and said
one of the connector pieces have matching images thereon prior to said proximity
positioning, to aid the user in matching said one of the attachment pieces and
said one of the connector pieces.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the connector pieces itself includes
interconnected pieces.
8. The method of claim 1, said positioning including initially placing said one
of the attachment pieces next to a piece other than said one of said connector
pieces, in which said one of said attachment pieces is then repositioned to appear
interconnected with said one of the connector pieces.
9. The method of claim 1, said positioning including moving said one of the attachment
pieces from one part of the tree to another part of the tree.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the particular task represents the installation
of a printer.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the attachment pieces is selected
from a menu on the monitor.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein said one of the attachment pieces is selected
from a toolbar on the monitor.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of pieces are displayed in a piled,
overlapping fashion.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the tree includes at least one subtree, the
tree and subtree having respective connector pieces having different shapes, and
wherein the attachment pieces include pieces that interconnect with said tree connector
piece and said subtree connector piece, respectively.
15. A processor-implemented method of performing a task, comprising:
displaying a first piece on a monitor connected to a processor, the first piece
positioned within a tree that includes a plurality of pieces, the first piece representing
a particular type of task to be performed, said plurality of pieces in the tree
representing respective tasks to be completed, and wherein each of said plurality
of pieces has a shape that i) corresponds to a type of task, and that ii) is different
from the shape of a piece in the tree corresponding to a different type of task;
displaying a second piece on the monitor, wherein the second piece is configured
to interconnect with the first piece, the first and second pieces having respective
preselected contours that substantially match when interconnected, thereby indicating
to a user of the method that the second piece represents a way of completing the
particular task represented by the first piece;
displaying the first and second pieces on the monitor in close proximity to each
other, said proximity displaying indicating a desire on the part of a user to perform
the particular task; and
inputting into the processor information necessary to perform the particular
task, wherein the user is prompted for said information following said positioning.
16. A method of creating a visual representation of a task to be performed, comprising:
displaying on a monitor a first set of pieces arranged in a tree, the pieces
corresponding to tasks to be performed, wherein the pieces are designed to mate
with respective counterpart pieces corresponding to ways of completing those tasks,
wherein each of the pieces in the tree has a shape that i) corresponds to a type
of task, and that ii) is different from the shape of a piece in the tree corresponding
to a different type of task;
displaying an additional piece on the monitor selected by a user to be a counterpart
piece; and
creating a piece in the tree, the created piece acting hierarchically as a parent
to the additional piece, wherein the created piece is taken from a database and
is inserted in the displayed tree in the event that there is no piece in the tree
that matches the additional piece and the created piece is required in the tree
as a parent to the additional piece, thereby communicating to the user that additional
selections must be made.
17. A computer program product, comprising:
a computer readable medium, the medium including machine-readable instructions
for carrying out the steps of the method of claim 1.
18. A computer program product, comprising:
a computer readable medium, the medium including machine-readable instructions
for carrying out the steps of the method of claim 15.
19. A computer program product, comprising:
a computer readable medium, the medium including machine-readable instructions
for carrying out the steps method of claim 16.
20. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used to install an operating
system of a computer.
21. The method of claim 1, wherein the method is used in an application selected
from the group consisting of system administration, human resources administration,
and procurement management.
22. The method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of displayed attachment pieces
have the same shape, thereby providing the user with more than one way to complete
the task corresponding to said same shape.
23. The method of claim 1, wherein the tasks include tasks selected from the
following: installation of software and configuration of software.
24. The method of claim 15, wherein said inputting includes confirming default
settings from the processor.
25. The method of claim 15, wherein the first and second pieces have matching
colors prior to said proximity displaying, to aid the user in matching the first
and second pieces.
26. The method of claim 15, wherein the first and second pieces have matching
images thereon prior to said proximity displaying to aid the user in matching the
first and second pieces.
27. The method of claim 15, comprising displaying a plurality of pieces configured
to interconnect with the first piece, thereby providing the user with more than
one way to complete the task corresponding to the first piece.
28. The method of claim 15, wherein the tasks include tasks selected from the
following: installation of software and configuration of software.
29. The method of claim 16, the tasks including tasks selected from the following:
installation of software and configuration of software.
30. The method of claim 16, each of the counterpart pieces being configured to
interconnect with at least one of the pieces in the tree, wherein each of the counterpart
pieces has a shape that corresponds to a type of task, such that when the shape
of a given piece in the tree matches the shape of a given counterpart piece, then
the given counterpart piece corresponds to a way of completing the task represented
by the given piece in the tree.
31. The method claim 30, comprising displaying a plurality of counterpart pieces
having the same shape, thereby providing the user with more than one way to complete
the task corresponding to said same shape.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD
The invention is in the field of computer/user interfaces. More particularly,
the invention relates to methods that facilitate a user's ability to complete tasks.
BACKGROUND
The applications commonly run on computers have increased in complexity to the
point that users are often forced to deal with procedures that can be quite complex
and involve long sequences of steps. The installation of a computer printer, for
example, can be quite cumbersome and may involve significant user input. Unfortunately,
the interfaces with which a user must work to run an application are not necessarily
easy to learn and use.
Windows, Icon, Menu, Pointer (WIMP) interfaces have dominated interface
technology for over two decades. They surpassed their predecessors in terms of
ease of use, primarily due to the application of direct manipulation interface
techniques (see, for example, B. Shneiderman,
Designing the user interface:
strategies for effective human-
computer-
interaction, 3rd edition,
Chapter 6, "Direct manipulation and virtual environments", pp. 184-233, 1998).
WIMP interfaces, which typically rely on the "point and click" technique, facilitate
direct physical actions on objects (i.e., icons or any other visual representation)
related to tasks to be performed, leading to increased productivity and improved
usability. Over the years WIMP interfaces have been improved in many ways. The
desktop metaphor (see, for example, J. A. Johnson et al., "The desktop metaphor
as an approach to user interface design", Proc. ACM Annual Conference on the Range
of Computing, pp. 548-549, 1985) supplemented direct manipulation interfaces by
providing a familiar organization style that relied upon recognition rather than
recall of the specific task names. Also, animated icons have been proposed as a
technique for presenting complex tasks to users by animating between pre- and post-task
representations of objects (see, for example, R. C. Bodner et al., "Using animated
icons to present complex tasks", Proceedings of CASCON, pp. 281-291, 1997).
However, tasks in many currently run applications are more complex than
what the desktop metaphor may suggest. They typically involve long sequences of
steps, and may involve a number of different objects. Attempting to address such
demands, developers have introduced task wizards, which have rapidly become the
de-facto solution to this problem of task complexity. Wizards are basically sequences
of dialogs that guide users in their tasks. They are, however, a deviation from
accomplishing tasks through the direct manipulation of objects, and can result
in usability problems (see, for example, J. M. Spool et al., "Designing for Complex
Products," Proc. ACM SIGCHI, Tutorials, pp. 395-399, 1995). Users often flounder
during some task wizards and hit dead ends due to missing prerequisites. This may
cause them to switch frequently among alternatives, explore a number of options,
and become frustrated. At the end of the process, users typically have trouble
verifying that they have completed the task properly since task wizards manipulate
objects indirectly. In addition, users may be unaware of any unintended side effects
of canceling certain operations or going back while working through the wizard's
dialogs. In some sense, wizards may be regarded as a step backwards from the principles
of direct manipulation of objects, reversible actions, and continuous feedback.
These problems have even led some to question the applicability of direct manipulation
interfaces to complex applications. There clearly remains a need for a more usable
approach to interacting with applications.
To this end, methodology is disclosed herein in which jigsaw pieces representing
tasks are arranged hierarchically in a tree. This methodology differs significantly
from the widget metaphors of, for example, Glinert who in his BLOX visual programming
language represented imperative programming constructs (e.g. IF, THEN, ELSE, WHILE,
etc.) using jigsaw-like tiles that can be stitched together to create program fragments,
and Bonar et al., who described a visual programming language called BridgeTalk,
in which constructs are implemented as icons that can be picked, manipulated, placed,
and connected together. (See P. E. Glinert, "Out of flatland: Towards 3-d visual
programming", Visual Programming Environments: Applications and Issues, IEEE Computer
Society Press, pp. 547-554, 1990; and Bonar et al., "A visual programming language
for novices", in Principles of Visual Programming Systems, S.-K. Chang, Ed., Prentice
Hall, pp. 326-366, 1990). Furthermore, the methodology herein differs from that
disclosed in the IBM April 1995 Technical Disclosure Bulletin "Access/Control Icons".
For example, these references do not disclose the hierarchical organization of
jigsaw pieces, and, in addition, the user is not prompted for input or information
necessary for the completion of a task after the corresponding jigsaw pieces have
been brought together.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
Computer applications are made more usable by enriching the visual language
of direct manipulation interfaces so that they yield not only more expressive power
but are also easier to learn and more usable. To this end, "jigsaw puzzle" type
pieces arranged hierarchically in a tree are used to facilitate task composition
suitable for complex applications.
In the jigsaw tree embodiments herein, task details are conveyed to the user
through
a visual plan represented by a jigsaw tree detailing the objects users need to
perform their tasks. The visual plan places the objects in part of a bigger puzzle,
thereby depicting the relationships among objects and what users have to do to
complete the task. This gives users flexibility as to how to approach the problem
at hand. It also offers flexible assistance without enforcing a specific sequence
of steps as wizards do. Each new task extends the existing hierarchy with new pieces,
thus eliminating repetitions by reusing existing structure unlike wizard approaches.
The jigsaw tree approach also allows users to learn the application more effectively
through direct manipulation. While it supports novice users in planning and performing
their tasks, it also supports expert users through copy, paste, and drop operations
that facilitate reuse.
One implementation of the invention is a method of performing a task in a processor-based
system that includes a monitor and a user input device for controlling information
displayed on the monitor. The method includes displaying on the monitor a plurality
of connector pieces representing respective tasks to be completed, in which the
pieces are arranged in a tree reflecting a hierarchy of tasks. A plurality of attachment
pieces are displayed on the monitor, in which each of the attachment pieces is
configured to interconnect with at least one of the connector pieces. The method
includes using the user input device to position one of the attachment pieces and
one of the connector pieces in close proximity with each other on the monitor,
with this positioning indicating a desire on the part of a user to complete the
task. The method also includes inputting into the processor information necessary
to perform the task, in which the user is prompted for this information following
the proximity positioning.
In a preferred implementation of the method, the inputting may include confirming
default settings from the processor. In another preferred implementation, the positioning
results in said one of the attachment pieces and said one of the connector pieces
appearing interconnected. In still other implementations, said one of the attachment
pieces and said one of the connector pieces may advantageously have matching images
thereon or matching colors, and said one of the attachment pieces and said one
of the connector pieces preferably have respective contours that substantially
match when they are interconnected. The positioning may include moving said one
of the attachment pieces from one part of the tree to another part of the tree.
In preferred implementations, said one of the attachment pieces may be selected
from a menu or from a toolbar on the monitor. The tree may include one or more
subtrees, with the tree and subtrees having respective connector pieces that have
different shapes, in which the attachment pieces include pieces that interconnect
with said tree connector piece and said subtree connector piece, respectively.
The positioning of said one of the connector pieces and said one of the attachment
pieces may include initially placing said one of the attachment pieces next to
a piece other than said one of said connector pieces, in which said one of said
attachment pieces is then repositioned to appear interconnected with said one of
the connector pieces. In certain implementations, one of the connector pieces itself
includes interconnected pieces.
Another implementation of the invention is a processor-implemented method
of performing a task. This method includes displaying a first piece on a monitor
connected to a processor, in which the first piece is positioned within a tree
that includes a plurality of pieces, and the first piece represents a task to be
performed. The method also includes displaying a second piece on the monitor, in
which the second piece is configured to interconnect with the first piece, the
first and second pieces having respective contours that substantially match when
they are interconnected. The first and second pieces on the monitor are positioned
in close proximity to each other, with this positioning indicating a desire on
the part of a user to perform the task. The method also includes inputting into
the processor information necessary to performing the task, in which the user is
prompted for said information following said positioning.
Yet another implementation of the invention is a method of creating a visual
representation of a task to be performed. The method includes displaying on a monitor
a first set of pieces arranged in a tree, in which the pieces correspond to tasks
to be performed, and wherein the pieces are designed to mate with respective counterpart
pieces. The method also includes displaying an additional piece on the monitor,
and creating a piece in the tree that acts hierarchically as a parent to the additional piece.
In preferred embodiments of the invention, there are provided computer program
products comprising computer readable media, in which the media include machine-readable
instructions for carrying out the methods disclosed herein.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
FIG. 1 shows an implementation of the invention, in which a hierarchical tree
is shown on the screen of a monitor, with certain jigsaw pieces within the tree
representing tasks to be completed and other jigsaw pieces being used to initiate
completion of those tasks.
FIG. 2 shows how selection of a port generates connector pieces corresponding
to the tasks of selecting a printer and a driver, respectively.
FIG. 3 shows a more complicated connector piece that is configured to receive
2 attachment pieces.
FIG. 4 shows a connector piece designed to receive an attachment piece, with
the attachment piece in turn configured to receive another attachment piece.
FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate how "dropping" a selected piece onto a tree results
in the dropped piece working its way down the tree until a suitable match is found.
FIGS. 6A and 6B show how an intermediate piece can be created if a dropped
piece has no matching piece in a tree.
FIGS. 7A, 7B, 7C, and 7D illustrate how pieces within
a tree can be stacked on top of each other or "piled".
FIG. 8 shows another implementation of the invention directed to administration
of an application server, showing a toolbar, a hierarchical tree, and a properties panel.
FIGS. 9A and 9B illustrate a sample task in the context of the administration
of an application server, in which the addition of a new servlet to a tree results
in the creation of connector jigsaw pieces for the web application and the servlet
engine, respectively.
FIG. 10 shows a software flowchart illustrating some of the preferred implementations
of the invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
In preferred embodiments of the invention, an icon configured as a jigsaw piece
represents a connector type for which there is an associated task to be completed,
and another (one or more) icon configured as a matching jigsaw piece is used to
initiate completion of that task. FIG. 1 shows a portion of a hierarchical "jigsaw"
tree
20, including several jigsaw pieces displayed on a screen
24
of a monitor
28. The monitor
28 is tied to and receives inputs from
a processor
32 or computer. (The processor
32 and its associated
user input or interaction device
34 are shown only in FIG. 1 for clarity.)
A jigsaw piece
36 stands ready to receive a mating piece
40 representing
a first port (or alternatively a piece
42 representing a second port) from
a menu or a tool bar
44. In this particular example, the piece
36
represents a hardware port ("port
1") that must be configured, and the piece
36 has as its "parent piece" a completed piece
38 designating the
computer's system. In general, a jigsaw piece such as the piece
36 could
represent a type of connector, such as a hardware port or a software process (such
as a web application, servlet engine, or network protocol). The user selects the
mating piece
40 from the tool bar
44 to bring the mating piece
40
next to the piece
36, as shown in FIG.
2. The mating piece
40
advantageously includes a textual label (such as the word "port") or another visual
label that identifies it as a piece that initiates configuration of the port when
mated with the piece
36. The pieces
36 and
40 advantageously
automatically snap or interconnect with each other when a user brings the piece
40 close to its counterpart
36 (e.g., the pieces
36 and
40
preferably having matching contours), resulting in the pieces
36 and
40
being depicted on the monitor
28 in an interlocked or interconnected state.
(Less preferably, the pieces
36 and
40 may simply be left positioned
in close proximity to each other, with the user recognizing nevertheless that they
represent a matched pair.) Pieces may be selected using the interaction device
34 such as a mouse or keyboard. Standard GUI functions may be advantageously
used such as selecting single or multiple pieces by clicking on them followed by
deleting, copying, pasting, or renaming them. To select all pieces along a certain
path in the tree hierarchy, the user may click on the first element of the path
and SHIFT-click on the last piece in the path.
The piece
36 can be regarded as a task to be completed (configuring the
port), or alternatively, the act of placing the piece
40 next to the piece
36 (resulting in their interconnection) can be regarded as initiating the
configuration process. In preferred embodiments, matching pairs of pieces (such
as pieces
36 and
40) may use color or images to aid the user in the
matching process, e.g., the pieces
36 and
40 may both be colored
green, or they may have matching background images thereon (not shown) that form
a continuous, integrated image when the pieces are interconnected. Jigsaw pieces
having multiple irregularities or protrusions to them may make them more easily
distinguishable from other pieces.
Interconnecting the pieces
36 and
40 in this example
generates two additional pieces
48 and
52 (in a subtree
54),
representing the tasks of selecting a printer (for the port 1) and a driver for
that printer, respectively. Furthermore, interconnecting the pieces
36 and
40 advantageously generates a properties panel
56 that may include
one or more boxes
60 into which the user inputs information. For example,
in one of the boxes
60 the user may input the port type, in another the
name of the server, and in another the print queue, and so on. (Alternatively,
the user may be asked to verify default settings in one or more boxes, in which
the defaults are given by the processor
32 or the computer.)
Likewise, when pieces selected from the tool bar
44 are interconnected
with the pieces
48 and
52, properties panels (not shown) corresponding
to the printer and driver, respectively, are displayed. The piece
48 can
be regarded as a task to be completed (namely, installing a printer), and the act
of placing a matching piece next to the piece
48, resulting in their interconnection,
can be regarded as initiating the printer setup process. (In preferred implementations,
the user may advantageously select from one of many pieces on the tool bar
44
representing different printers. Likewise, there may be several pieces (not shown)
on the toolbar
44 representing different drivers.) A properties panel for
a printer may advantageously include a box for the make and model of the printer
to be interfaced with the computer, and in another box the paper size(s) may be
set. More than one matching piece for the piece
48 may be displayed on the
tool bar
44, so that the user may select from more than one printer.
Thus, a properties panel prompts the user to input information (which may include
confirming default settings) in a convenient and comfortable manner. When a piece
is mated with a corresponding piece, such as mating the pair of pieces
36
and
40, the user is thereby provided with a visual indication that the particular
task represented by the pair has either been completed or, if a properties panel
is displayed, is in the process of being completed. Likewise, a task may be undone
(reversed) by removing a matching piece from its counterpart, e.g., port
1
may be deselected by dragging the piece
40 away from the piece
36.
Thus, in the example of FIGS. 1 and 2, a convenient method of interfacing a port
with hardware (devices, such as printers and modems) is presented.
Each of the nodes
61 of a hierarchical tree represents a point for a
jigsaw piece, in which the various nodes are linked through lines representing
the tree, as seen for example in FIG. 2. A jigsaw tree can be thought of as an
unordered tree with a single "root" piece that may have associated "children" pieces,
in which each of the children also represents a subtree. A tree generally includes
connector-attachment pairs (e.g., pieces
36 and
40, respectively).
In the embodiments described herein, the pieces have only single connectors and
their corresponding attachments have no children.
The "jigsaw" pieces herein offer advantages over conventional icons with respect
to their expressive capabilities and richness of interaction. Firstly, the visual
design of the jigsaw pieces suggests which pieces will match or interconnect with
each other. Secondly, pieces can be attached for a period of time and removed later.
For example, the port
1 can be deselected by removing the mating piece
40.
(Likewise, a printer can be uninstalled in an analogous fashion by removing the
appropriate mating attachment piece.) Thirdly, more complicated pieces having highly
irregular features such as protrusions and/or holes can be used to represent tasks
requiring more than one object, thereby supporting richer interactions. For example,
as illustrated in FIG. 3, a jigsaw piece
62 representing a user's account
is contoured to receive both a jigsaw piece
63 representing a user name
and a piece
64 representing a password. In this case, the user may interconnect
the pieces
62 and
63 to form a larger piece that is then connected
with the piece
64. Fourthly, pieces may support complex tasks by visual
composition of many jigsaw pieces into more complex forms. As illustrated in FIG.
4, a jigsaw piece
65 representing an academic course is contoured to first
receive a piece
66 representing a professor. The piece
66 in turn
receives a piece
67 representing a session taught by that professor.
The jigsaw tree
20 takes advantage of the structural capabilities of conventional
trees: subtrees
54 can be advantageously collapsed and expanded, deleted,
copied, and pasted to other parts of the tree. This manipulation of subtrees may
be particularly useful in the context of a system administrator application, in
which a number of computers are involved. In this case, the root piece could be
designated as a computer domain consisting of a number of computers. By copying
a subtree out of a single computer, the system administrator can configure a number
of computers at once.
In addition, pieces selected from the toolbar
44 or menu can be advantageously
dragged and dropped, so that they automatically attach themselves to appropriate
pieces on the tree
20. A piece selected from the toolbar
44 may attach
itself to a piece (e.g., piece
36) next to which it is placed or dropped,
as shown in FIGS. 5A and 5B. FIG. 5A shows a tree
70 onto which a user has
"dropped" an attachment piece
74. The piece
74 is associated with
a matching connector piece
78 within the tree
70. After the piece
74 is dropped, it works its way down the tree to mate with the matching
piece
78. The pieces
74 and
78 thereby form an interconnected
pair
80 as shown in FIG.
5B. The attachment piece
74 may later
be removed from the connector piece
78 by dragging the piece
74 away,
leaving the piece
78 behind.
The jigsaw tree
20 is preferably not so large that the number of pieces
presents recall problems for the user, e.g., when the tree becomes too large to
fit into the viewer's window and scrolling becomes necessary. However, this issue
can be mitigated somewhat by collapsing and expanding subtrees. Additionally, the
visual distinction between the connector and attachment pieces (e.g., the left
hand piece
36 and the right hand piece
40 shown in FIG. 2) should
be sufficiently clear that the user is unlikely to be confused between them. Also,
if the complexity of the visual properties of the jigsaw pieces (in terms of how
irregular their contours are) is too great, then the user may have difficulty in
rapidly recognizing matching pieces from among all those pieces shown on the tool
bar
44.
FIGS. 6A and 6B depict an example in which a piece
90 is dropped onto
a tree
94, but the piece
90 has no matching pieces in the tree. In
this case, an intermediate piece
98 is created, in which the intermediate
piece
98 acts as a parent to the piece
90. Accordingly, the dropped
piece
90 is placed underneath the piece
98 in its own subtree where
the piece
90 functions as a child to the piece
98. Intermediate pieces
are created based on the application-specific hierarchy. In the example of FIGS.
6A and 6B, the piece
90 may represent a printer to be installed (with a
corresponding properties panel—not shown—popping up prompting the
user for inputs), and the created intermediate piece
98 may represent the
task of installing a port for that printer. The creation of an intermediate piece
informs the user that completion of a desired task requires additional objects
and communicates which types of objects are needed. Pieces in a tree having no
associated counterparts indicate the existence of missing objects required for
completion of the task.
As shown in FIGS. 7A,
7B,
7C, and
7D "piles" may be used
to represent groupings of pieces (see, for example, R. Mander et al., "A ‘pile’
metaphor for supporting casual organization of information", Proc. ACM SIGCHI,
pp. 627-634, 1992). Piling helps to compact the representation without hiding the
pieces completely. It works much like tree compaction, but it is preferably used
only for sibling pieces (pieces having the same parent). In FIG. 7A a number of
pieces
110 ("A"),
112 ("B"),
114 ("C"),
116 ("D") are
shown in a tree
120. A user selects the pieces
110,
112,
114
and right-clicks on them to collect (group) them in a pile
124, as shown
in FIG.
7B. As shown in FIGS. 7C and 7D, certain pieces may be extracted
from the pile
124 by selecting their names from a pop-up menu
126.
Pieces can be added to an existing pile by dragging and dropping them over the pile.
Complex applications such as system administration, human resources administration,
procurement management, etc. may all lend themselves to use with the jigsaw tree
embodiments disclosed herein. These applications typically have a hierarchy of
objects of various types (e.g., installing a printer may involve the selection
of a port, printer, and driver) and tasks having complex procedures, i.e., a number
of steps involving many prerequisites. The jigsaw tree in such cases represents
the hierarchy of application-specific objects, which are shown as jigsaw pieces.
Tasks may be mapped to a hierarchy of jigsaw sub-trees.
To use a jigsaw tree in an application, designers should preferably 1) identify
objects and their relationships to each other, 2) identify tasks and related objects,
3) create an application-specific hierarchy of objects, 4) design jigsaw pieces
for objects, and 5) translate tasks into physical actions. A jigsaw tree for an
application-server administration interface designed with these procedures in mind
is now described. The jigsaw tree in this example replaces a wizard-style interface
having 18 task wizards, some having as many as 9 steps. To this end, a hierarchy
of server administration objects was compiled such as nodes, servers, applications,
and servlets (nodes contain servers which contain applications). All tasks were
examined to determine their prerequisite objects. For example, installing a servlet
requires a servlet engine, a web application, an application server and a node.
A suitably designed interface consists of three regions and is illustrated in
FIG.
8: 1) a toolbar
140 for selecting jigsaw pieces
144; 2) a
tree
148 showing the current hierarchy of objects, and 3) a properties panel
152 for further specification of the selected object properties. To add
new objects into the administration domain, users select pieces from the toolbar
140, and drag and drop them onto the jigsaw tree
148. As pieces are
added, the hierarchy of the objects changes, with intermediate pieces being created,
if necessary, as described above. The user may then proceed to complete tasks by
inserting missing pieces from the toolbar
140 and specifying properties
by editing them in the properties panel
152.
FIGS. 9A and 9B show a task of installing a new servlet. In this example, a
piece
160 representing the top-level administration domain contains a node
164 (arbitrarily called "Hawaii") running an application server (called
"Banking") represented by a piece
168. The server
168 contains an
(Enterprise Java Bean) EJB Container (labeled "Accounts Container") represented
by a piece
172, holding the EJBs labeled "Savings EJB" and "Checking EJB"
represented by the pieces
176 and
180, respectively. To install the
new servlet, the user drags a piece
188 representing the new servlet from
the toolbar and drops it over the top-level administration domain piece
160.
Correct installation of a servlet requires a hierarchy of objects such as a node,
an application server, a web application, and a servlet engine. All of these are
already present in FIG. 9A except for the web application and the servlet engine.
As a result, when the new servlet piece
188 is dropped over the domain piece
160, two intermediate pieces are automatically created (as described above
in connection with FIGS.
6A and
6B), namely, connector pieces
190
and
192 corresponding to the web application and the servlet engine, respectively.
The addition of a new servlet would preferably also create intermediate pieces
for the application server and the node had they not already been installed.
In a wizard-style interface, on the other hand, users must invoke the "install
serviet" wizard, which requires that the web application contain the serviet However,
if the user had not installed a web application previously, "create" and "configure
web application" wizards would also be needed. In addition, "configure application
server" and "create node" wizards may also be needed. The potential problem would
be that a novice user might not be aware of these prerequisites before starting
an "install serviet" wizard. The interface discussed above in connection with FIGS.
9A and 9B solves this problem by providing a user with a visual plan with jigsaw
pieces. The jigsaw metaphor is thus useful, not only for representing the prerequisites
for each task but also for showing them in their current state of the application
or system.
The methodology herein may also be advantageously applied to the installation
of an operating system, which typically involves many tasks that, in the wizard
approach, requires the user to know about prerequisites, related objects, installation
procedures, etc. The jigsaw approach herein may help in installing an operating
system by providing a user with a visual plan showing options, prerequisites, etc.,
thereby facilitating the installation of the operating system with greater ease.
Likewise, image processing (e.g., processing digital images) involves tasks such
as applying various transformations, masks, etc., which similarly lend themselves
to a jigsaw tree representation. Having a visual representation for these tasks
allows the user to produce different digital images in a more efficient way by
customizing the ordering of applications of transformations to an image and by
updating the parameters to these transformations more easily.
In preferred embodiments of the invention, there is provided media encoded with
executable program code to effect any of the methods described herein. These media
may include a magnetic or optical disk or diskette, for example. In preferred embodiments,
this program code may be read by a digital processing apparatus such as a computer
for performing any one or more of the methods disclosed herein.
FIG. 10 illustrates in flowchart form the structure of software directed to
some of the preferred methodology disclosed herein. A user selects an attachment
piece, e.g., the piece
40 from the tool bar
44, as shown in step
200. The user then places the selected attachment piece near a target connector
piece (e.g., the piece
36) in the currently displayed tree, as shown in
step
204. A decision point
208 is then reached with respect to whether
the selected attachment piece and the target connector piece match. If they do,
then the target connector piece is connected to the selected attachment piece (as
in step
212), resulting in the appropriate properties panel (e.g., the panel
56) being displayed (as in step
216). The user then inputs his or
her preferences into the properties panel (e.g., into the boxes
60) and/or
verifies default settings, as shown in step
220.
If, on the other hand, the target connector piece and the selected attachment
piece do not match, then a decision point
224 is reached with respect to
whether there is another connector piece in the subtree of the target connector
piece that matches the selected attachment piece. (This situation is presented
in FIG. 5A, for example, in which the dropped piece
74 does not match the
target connector piece at the top of the tree
70.) If there is a matching
connector piece in the subtree, then the selected attachment piece drops down the
displayed tree and connects with this matching connector piece, as in step
228
(see FIG. 5B, for example). This results in the properties panel being displayed,
as discussed above (step
216), and the user inputs his or her preferences
(step
220). However, if there is not a matching connector piece in the subtree
of the target connector piece, then a further decision point is reached (step
232),
namely, does the selected attachment piece match a connector piece in any of the
subtrees that could be constructed that would be of interest to the user in the
context of his or her application? To this end, the processor advantageously accesses
a database (not shown) of all such possibilities in the form of "template" trees
representing the universe of such trees of interest. If no matching connector piece
in this database is found, then the selected attachment piece is not accepted,
and the user must start the process over again (step
236)—but if
such a matching piece is found in the database, then the appropriate matching connector
piece along with all required (intermediate) connector pieces are created in accordance
with the template tree database (step
240). These created pieces are inserted
into the displayed tree (step
244), with the selected attached piece being
connected with the newly created matching connector piece (as shown in FIG. 6B,
for example). The properties panel is then displayed (step
216), with the
user inputting his or her preferences (step
220).
The invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from
its spirit or essential characteristics. The described embodiments are to be considered
in all respects only as illustrative and not restrictive. The scope of the invention
is therefore indicated by the appended claims rather than the foregoing description.
All changes within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are to be
embraced within that scope.
*
