From: owner-3dui@hitl.washington.edu on behalf of Jeff Pierce
[jpierce@cs.cmu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2000 4:39 PM
To: 3dui List
Subject: Re: Cross-Tasking.

At 04:33 PM 1/25/00, Robert W. Lindeman wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Doug Bowman mused:
>
>Hi Doug (et al),
>
>[snip]
>
>> The point is - people have been doing this for a while, and
>> I just added a little formalism (and a not-so-catchy name)
>> to it, plus doing a couple of simple experiments.
>> 
>> Any other ideas for cross-task techniques? Hypotheses for when
>> this might be useful?
>
>I also didn't mean to sound like there hasn't been any work on this.
>IMVHO, it would be nice to see more work done on this. (I know we've kind
>of split on a tangent from Ernst's original query, but...)
>I think shoe-horning one type of interaction to be used for another
>(either using a manip technique for loco, or a loco technique for manip)
>would be suboptimal.

I think that depends on the technique.  We've found a number of cases (the
WIM, the image plane techniques Doug mentioned) where the same technique
can be smoothly used for both manipulation and navigation.  Granted it
won't be optimal for all techniques, but it won't be suboptimal for all
techniques either.

Jeff