- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@virgin.net>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 18:14:52 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Just to quote some references on the visual aspect, together with sources (marked src:) If adding graphics, which should we choose? regards, DaveP src: http://www-pcd.stanford.edu/frankie/thesis/html/related.html #HEADING1-122 Classifying Signs Peirce[86] classified signs into three groups: icons, indexes, and symbols. Uzilevsky and Andreev describe the classifications by stating that "[s]igns were related to objects by resembling them ('icons'), being causally connected to them ('indexes') or being conventionally tied to them ('symbols')." [107] By these definitions, an icon representing fire might be a picture of flame, an index for fire might be smoke or heat, and a symbol for fire might be the color red. Signs that are created using sounds to represent a visual item would generally fall into the latter two classifications, so that, for example, the sound of paper rustling would be an index for a document, while an earcon that is devised and taught to the user population would be a symbol for the document. While sound icons (under Peirce's definition) can exist, by the strict definition they may only be used to represent other sounds, such as when a movie sound effects designer uses the sound of coconut shells pounding on a table to simulate horse footsteps. [107] Uzilevsky, G. and V. Andreev. Iconic signs and languages in user interface development. In L.J. Bass et al., editors, Human-Computer Interaction. Third International Conference, EWHCI '93, pages 115-24, Berlin, Germany, August 1993. Springer-Verlag. [86] Peirce, C.S. Collected papers. Volumes 1-2. Cambridge, MA, 1960.
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 1999 13:13:36 UTC