文本检索系统中的用户界面:给编辑的一封信

Jeffrey F. Raskin
{"title":"文本检索系统中的用户界面:给编辑的一封信","authors":"Jeffrey F. Raskin","doi":"10.1145/329671.329687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As Landauer has pointed out [1995] Boolean searches often are not an optimal form of target specification for text retrieval (that they are widely used is insufficient reason to promote them). Rather than presenting a list of documents as the result of a search, text retrieval can generally be improved by presenting the user with each found instance as it is found. Such a search can proceed while the user is inspecting the instance just found, making the system seem much faster [Raskin, 1989]. An interactive, incremental search is often preferable to either of the two kinds of dialogs Drori discusses because each instance found gives feedback on the appropriateness of the search key while it is being developed, saving the user t ime and frustration. I have found that users tend to prefer an incremental search (e.g. that o f the EMACS","PeriodicalId":7397,"journal":{"name":"ACM SIGCHI Bull.","volume":"1 1","pages":"37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The user interface in text retrieval systems: a letter to the editor\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey F. Raskin\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/329671.329687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As Landauer has pointed out [1995] Boolean searches often are not an optimal form of target specification for text retrieval (that they are widely used is insufficient reason to promote them). Rather than presenting a list of documents as the result of a search, text retrieval can generally be improved by presenting the user with each found instance as it is found. Such a search can proceed while the user is inspecting the instance just found, making the system seem much faster [Raskin, 1989]. An interactive, incremental search is often preferable to either of the two kinds of dialogs Drori discusses because each instance found gives feedback on the appropriateness of the search key while it is being developed, saving the user t ime and frustration. I have found that users tend to prefer an incremental search (e.g. that o f the EMACS\",\"PeriodicalId\":7397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM SIGCHI Bull.\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM SIGCHI Bull.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/329671.329687\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM SIGCHI Bull.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/329671.329687","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

正如Landauer[1995]所指出的那样,布尔搜索通常不是文本检索目标规范的最佳形式(它们被广泛使用并不足以成为推广它们的理由)。与将文档列表作为搜索结果显示不同,文本检索通常可以通过向用户显示所找到的每个实例来改进。这样的搜索可以在用户检查刚刚找到的实例的同时进行,使系统看起来快得多[Raskin, 1989]。交互式的增量搜索通常比Drori讨论的两种对话框中的任何一种都更可取,因为找到的每个实例都会在开发过程中对搜索键的适当性提供反馈,从而节省了用户的时间和挫折感。我发现用户倾向于增量搜索(例如EMACS的搜索)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The user interface in text retrieval systems: a letter to the editor
As Landauer has pointed out [1995] Boolean searches often are not an optimal form of target specification for text retrieval (that they are widely used is insufficient reason to promote them). Rather than presenting a list of documents as the result of a search, text retrieval can generally be improved by presenting the user with each found instance as it is found. Such a search can proceed while the user is inspecting the instance just found, making the system seem much faster [Raskin, 1989]. An interactive, incremental search is often preferable to either of the two kinds of dialogs Drori discusses because each instance found gives feedback on the appropriateness of the search key while it is being developed, saving the user t ime and frustration. I have found that users tend to prefer an incremental search (e.g. that o f the EMACS
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Students Coordinating user interfaces for consistency Universal commands for telephony-based spoken language systems The magic of visual interaction design On sharing resources and donating books: What are we doing wrong? Is this the bull-in-a-china-shop syndrome?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1