skip to main content
10.1145/1281500.1281546acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessiggraphConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

LADDER, a sketching language for user interface developers

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 August 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

Sketch recognition systems are currently being developed for many domains, but can be time consuming to build if they are to handle the intricacies of each domain. In order to aid sketch-based user interface developers, we have developed tools to simplify the development of a new sketch recognition interface. We created LADDER, a language to describe how sketched diagrams in a domain are drawn, displayed, and edited. We then automatically transform LADDER structural descriptions into domain specific shape recognizers, editing recognizers, and shape exhibitors for use in conjunction with a domain independent sketch recognition system, creating a sketch recognition system for that domain. We have tested our framework by writing several domain descriptions and automatically generating a domain specific sketch recognition system from each description.

References

  1. Alvarado C. A natural sketching environment: bringing the computer into early stages of mechanical design. Master's thesis, MIT, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Landay JA, Myers BA. Interactive sketching for the early stages of user interface design. In: Proceedings of CHI '95: Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1995. p. 43--50. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Stahovich T. Sketchit: a sketch interpretation tool for conceptual mechanism design. Technical Report, MIT AI Laboratory, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Hammond T, Davis R. Tahuti: a geometrical sketch recognition system for uml class diagrams, AAAI Spring Symposium on Sketch Understanding 2002; 59--68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Damm CH, Hansen KM, Thomsen M. Tool support for cooperative object-oriented design: gesture based modeling on an electronic whiteboard. In: CHI 2000, CHI; 2000. p. 518--25. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ideogramic, Ideogramic UML#8482;, Ideogramic ApS, Denmark, http://www.ideogramic.com/products/, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Lank E, Thorley JS, Chen SJ-S. An interactive system for recognizing hand drawn UML diagrams. In: Proceedings for CASCON 2000; 2000. p. 7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Lin J, Newman MW, Hong JI, Landay J. DENIM: finding a tighter fit between tools and practice for web site design. In: CHI Letters: Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI; 2000. p. 510--7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Caetano A, Goulart N, Fonseca M, Jorge J. JavaSketchIt: issues in sketching the look of user interfaces, Sketch Understanding. Papers from the 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Lecolinet E. Designing guis by sketch drawing and visual programming. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI 1998), AVI, New York: ACM Press, 1998. p. 274--6. URLciteseer. nj.nec.com/lecolinet98designing.html Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Do EY-L. Vr sketchpad---create instant 3d worlds by sketching on a transparent window. In: de Vries B, van Leeuwen JP, Achten HH, editors. CAAD Futures 2001. 2001. p. 161--72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mahoney JV, Fromherz MPJ. Handling ambiguity in constraint-based recognition of stick figure sketches. SPIE Document Recognition and Retrieval IX Conference, San Jose, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Pittman J, Smith I, Cohen P, Oviatt S, Yang T. Quickset: a multimodal interface for military simulations. Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Computer-Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation, 1996. p. 217--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Hse H, Shilman M, Newton AR, Landay J. Sketch-based user interfaces for collaborative object-oriented modeling. Berkley CS260 Class Project (December 1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Zue, Glass, Conversational interfaces: advances and challenges. Proceedings of IEEE, 2000. p. 1166--80.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. VoiceXML Forum, http://www.voicexml.org/specs/VoiceXML-100.pdf, Voice eXtensible Markup Language, 1st ed. (07 March 2000).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hammond T, Davis R. LADDER: a language to describe drawing, display, and editing in sketch recognition. Proceedings of the 2003 International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hammond T, Davis R. Automatically transforming symbolic shape descriptions for use in sketch recognition. Proceedings of the 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-04).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Rubine D. Specifying gestures by example. Computer Graphics 1991;25(4):329--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Long AC. Quill: a gesture design tool for pen-based user interfaces, Eecs department, computer science division, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, December 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Sezgin TM. Feature point detection and curve approximation for early processing in sketch recognition. Master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, June 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Alvarado C, Davis R. Sketchread: a multi-domain sketch recognition engine. In: Proceedings of UIST '04, 2004. p. 23--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Friedman-Hill E, Jess, the Java expert system shell. http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Stiny G, Gips J. Shape grammars and the generative specification of painting and sculpture. In: Freiman CV, editor. Information processing, vol. 71. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1972. p. 1460--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Gips J. Computer implementation of shape grammars. NSF/MIT Workshop on Shape Computation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Futrelle RP, Nikolakis N. Efficient analysis of complex diagrams using constraint-based parsing. In: ICDAR-95 (International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition), Montreal, Canada; 1995. p. 782--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Bimber O, Encarnacao LM, Stork A. A multi-layered architecture for sketch-based interaction within virtual environments. Computer and Graphics (Special Issue on Calligraphic Interfaces: Towards a New Generation of Interactive Systems) 2000; 24(6): 851--67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Mahoney JV, Fromherz MPJ. Three main concerns in sketch recognition and an approach to addressing them. In: Sketch Understanding, Papers from the 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium. Stanford, CA: AAAI Press, 2002. p. 105--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Caetano A, Goulart N, Fonseca M, Jorge J. Sketching user interfaces with visual patterns. Proceedings of the First Ibero-American Symposium in Computer Graphics (SIACG02), 2002. p. 271--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Shilman M, Pasula H, Russell S, Newton R. Statistical visual language models for ink parsing. In: Sketch Understanding, Papers from the 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium. Stanford, CA: AAAI Press, 2002. p. 126--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee S-W. Recognizing circuit symbols with attributed graph matching. In: Baird H, Bunke H, Yamamoto K, editors. Structured document image analysis, 1992. p. 340--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Keating JP, Mason RL. Some practical aspects of covariance estimation. Pattern Recognition Letters 1985; 3(5):295--350.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Calhoun C, Stahovich TF, Kurtoglu T, Kara LB. Recognizing multi-stroke symbols. Sketch Understanding. Papers from the 2002 AAAI Spring Symposium, 2002. p. 15--23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Gross MD, Do EY-L. Demonstrating the electronic cocktail napkin: a paper-like interface for early design. 'Common Ground' appeared in ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing (CHI), 1996. p. 5--6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Jacob RJK, Deligiannidis L, Morrison S. A software model and specification language for non-WIMP = user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 1999;6(1):1--46 URLciteseer.nj.nec.com/jacob99software.html. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Costagliola G, Tortora G, Orefice S, Lucia D. Automatic generation of visual programming environments. IEEE Computer 1995; 56--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Veselova O. Perceptually based learning of shape descriptions. Master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Hammond T, Davis R. Shady: a shape description debugger for use in sketch recognition. AAAI Fall Symposium on Making Pen-Based Interaction Intelligent and Natural.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. LADDER, a sketching language for user interface developers

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader