A consistently valuable interface design prompt for me: how would I do [X activity] with paper/pen/physical tools? The answer is often so much more fluid and improvisational than typical UI idioms and "data structures" tend to produce!
Conversation
If I "highlight" something on a computer, it needs to represent that with a literal start offset and length. But annotating a physical document is often intentionally vague and gestural—attach a sticky to the general vicinity of an area, shade a line down the margin, etc.
Replying to
I can improvise purpose-specific solutions with a physical highlighter: draw a box around something; make special marks in a personal code; write big-font marginalia. Most interfaces permit only pre-set verbs and a small surrounding space of creative repurposing.
2
25
This is an old problem, of course. There's a great discussion in "Formality considered harmful"[1] (via , I think!). See also Smalltalk, Dynamicland, Chalktalk…
[1] andymatuschak.org/files/papers/S
1
2
35
Replying to
Speaking of annotation, specifically: you might find this (from ) interesting! joe.cat/UIST-highlight/
This fuzziness is also why I'm annoyed by "extraction-centric" models of highlighting. Much prefer fuzzy pointers/portals, as we tried to do in
Quote Tweet
GIF
Replying to @andy_matuschak and @MuseAppHQ
Something like this? From dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/33 (pdf here:
2
5
18
Feel like you could appreciate
Quote Tweet
Maybe worst, "you may start to think that the text is the 'canonical' format [...] if that text comes out wrong, and you'll treat everything in the world only in terms of how you can convert it to text..." bounded expectations will limit YOUR thinking twitter.com/rsnous/status/
Show this thread
1
2
Show replies