The 11th International Conference on Geometry and Graphics, 1-5 August, 2004, Guangzhou, China

A REAL WORLD METAPHOR INTERFACE FOR AN

EDUCATIONAL GEOMETRY DRAWING SOFTWARE

Eduardo Toledo SANTOS, André Luís L. de OLIVEIRA and Leandro LOURENZONI

Escola Politécnica, University of São Paulo, Brazil

ABSTRACT Conventional (WIMP) interfaces have many shortcomings when applied to drawing programs in the context
of geometry instruction. Among them are: High complexity, implying waste of time to learn the interface instead of the
target contents; availability of shortcuts to solve problems that ought to be constructed geometrically by the student and;
none resemblance to real drawing instruments. A new interface for an educational geometry drawing software, aiming to
mitigate those problems, is presented in this paper. Following the direct manipulation, concrete, real world metaphor style,
this new interface features four drawing tools (triangle set, compass, pencil/eraser), which behave almost like their real
counterparts. Due to its characteristics, the proposed interface is intended to be very intuitive, not requiring any operating
instructions and being capable of implementing all compass-and-ruler geometric constructions, while training the
apprentice in the correct ways of using real drawing instruments.
Keywords: Graphical User Interfaces, Real World Metaphor, Educational Software, Geometry.

1. INTRODUCTION
There is a growing interest
in using e-learning for
geometry and/or technical
drawing teaching, both in
distance education and as
a supplement to face-to-
face courses. Although
there are many geometry
drawing programs being
used for educational
purposes, some
shortcomings may be
identified in their user
interfaces when used as a
(partial) replacement for
paper and pencil practice.
Most of those programs
adopt a conventional
Graphic User Interface
(GUI), based on windows,
icons, menus and pointing
(WIMP). Due to this, like
any other software, they
demand some user’s time
to be mastered. Likewise,
most of them have many
features, allowing a full
range of graphical
constructions (tangent,
parallel and perpendicular
lines, middle point,
bisectors, inscribed and
circumscribed circles etc.)
to be executed with a few
clicks. Finally, their GUIs
are very abstract, far apart
from the drawing
instruments the students
use in classroom.
A non-intuitive GUI is a
particular problem in that
context because, among
other reasons, as it is
widely known, the credits
assigned to graphics
disciplines, with a few
exceptions, have been
reduced worldwide. Hence,
it is very undesirable to
have a student spending
time to learn how to drive
a new program instead of
practicing the target topics
of a course in the short
time available.
Furthermore, as this kind
of software usually covers
only a small part of a
discipline’s contents its use
is occasional and is not
worth investing much time
for learning it.
Different from a CAD
(Computer Aided Design)
system, where drawing
efficiency is among the
most important
requirements, an
educational tool must
sacrifice execution speed
in favor of pedagogic
issues, if needed.
Therefore, a plethora of
features for easy execution
of any foreseeable
construction is not only
undesirable because it
precludes the student of
performing a geometrical
construction the way he
must practice, but also
makes steeper the software
learning curve.
Concerning the abstraction
aspect of the GUI, it is not
known to which extent the
use of an artificial,
computer interface for
drawing can hamper the
abilities of an apprentice
regarding the correct
manipulation of drawing
instruments (compass,
triangles, ruler, pencil).
The authors plan to
investigate this issue.
This paper describes an
interface based on a real
world metaphor featuring
drawing tools. This
interface is under
development by the
authors and will integrate
a geometry educational
software, accessible
through the WWW.
2. THE NEW
INTERFACE
To fulfill the needs stated
before, a direct
manipulation, concrete,
real world metaphor
interface was proposed as
an alternative GUI to an
educational geometry
drawing software. This
interface has no menus or
buttons. It resembles a
paper sheet over a drawing
table and features only
four drawing instruments:
a triangle set (45-90° and
30-60-90° degrees), a
compass and a pencil with
eraser. Figure 1 illustrates
its future appearance.
A few icons will be
incorporated in the
interface so that the user
can open and save files,
undo operations, etc.
Figure 1 – Real World
Metaphor Interface
A concern for every
designer of a geometry-
drawing program is if the
available functionality in
the software is enough to
allow the user to perform
all the geometric
constructions possible with
a compass and a ruler. In
the present case, this is a
non-issue as the drawing
objects implemented by the
interface cover all the
drawing-related
affordances1 of the
corresponding
instruments.
The proposed interface
incorporates the “local
1
“Affordances” are the
possibilities that an object
or environment offers (or
appears to offer) in order
to perform an action upon
it (Dürsteler, 2002).
tools” concept (Bederson
et al., 1996): unlike tool
palettes, where there can
be only one tool active at a
time, local tools can be
picked up, used and put
down anywhere in the
work surface, retaining
their attributes (pencil
color, compass radius,
etc.). Bederson el al.
(1996) found out that this
interaction style is easily
learned with minimal
instruction, even by very
young children.
In addition, the “composite
tool” concept (Daughtry;
Amant, 2003) also can be
identified in the proposed
interface by the manner
the drawing instruments
interact with each other to
increase their usefulness.
2.1 Direct Manipulation
Direct Manipulation
Interfaces have three
defining principles
(Schneiderman, 1997),
which most GUIs
implement:
 Continuous
representation of the
objects and actions of
interest;
 Physical actions or
presses of labeled
buttons instead of
complex syntax;
 Rapid incremental
reversible operations
whose effect on the
object of interest is
immediately visible.
A direct manipulation
paradigm was chosen
because all the benefits
cited by Schneiderman
(1997) for this kind of
interface are desirable in
this project:
 Novices can learn
basic functionality
quickly;
 Intermittent users can gnome). Concrete user utilizes both hands positioning
retain operational metaphors are those based when interacting with
For precise alignment of
concepts; on things (e.g. pencil) drawing instruments in the
the pencil tip, compass
 Error messages are while conceptual real world. Sliding a 45°
lead/needle or triangle’s
rarely needed; metaphors are abstract triangle on the edge of a
edges with drawn lines or
 Users can immediately (e.g. peace). 30-60° triangle for
points, a highlight and
see if their actions are obtaining parallel lines or
Vääinänen and Schmidt “snap” feature was
furthering their goals; holding a triangle in place
(1994) believe that implemented. When these
 Users experience less and, at the same time,
concrete real-world user-controlled parts (tips
anxiety because the drawing a line at its edge
metaphors may be the or edges) pass over (or
system is with the pencil are
most appropriate for naïve very near) any point or
comprehensible and operations that demand
and casual users, which line, these drawn elements
because actions can be two hands. Likewise, some
are characteristics of our are highlighted, signaling
reversed so easily; operations on only one
target audience the user to release the
instrument may require
 Users gain confidence (apprentices, first time mouse button if he wants
both hands (e.g. adjusting
and mastery because users). to align the instrument
compass radius).
they are the initiators part with that element. If
If an interface has only
of action, they feel in Other issues relate to the he does so, that part will
representations of real-
control, and the required precision for be precisely positioned on
world objects users will
system responses are positioning instruments or the element, which
naturally know what to do
predictable. drawing points and lines at changes its color to
with them (Michels, 1995) exact places. indicate activation of the
2.2 Real-World as they are acquainted with
snap. Furthermore, if the
Metaphors those objects and already Some clever techniques snapped part was a
know their perceived were employed to
Metaphors are associations triangle’s edge, it will be
affordances (Norman, circumvent these problems
between the user’s world pivoted around a single
2000). and, at the same time,
and concepts of the point or, if a line or two
keep the interaction
computer universe. They The virtual instruments in points were highlighted at
intuitive, as it is shown in
are extensively used in the new interface closely the same time, the edge
the following sections.
modern interfaces due to emulate their real will be restricted to slide
their intuitiveness (e.g. counterparts (both visually 3.1 Heavy objects for over the two points or the
Windows and Macintosh’s and behaviorally) and it is one-handed input line. To release from the
folders, files and trash can, hoped that their snap, the user must drag
A “heavy instrument” the instrument away from
representing office manipulation will be
metaphor was adopted for the snapping drawings.
objects). intuitive enough to dismiss
allowing the user to
any explanation or
Metaphors can be position one instrument The ruler marks (on some
instruction.
classified according to its and them using another triangle’s edges) are active
attributes (Vääinänen and tool touching the first but in this same sense and,
3. DEALING WITH therefore, pencil and
Schmidt, 1994): without moving it (e.g.
INPUT compass tips can be
triangle sliding against the
 Real-world vs. non- LIMITATIONS precisely snapped to them.
edge of another triangle or
real-world metaphors; Although bimanual pencil drawing line against
 Concrete vs. Although these features
interaction has some a triangle edge).
conceptual metaphors; are not present in real
advantages (BUTLE; objects, it is hoped that
 Spatial vs. time-based Objects can be moved by
AMANT, 2004), they they are simple enough so
metaphors; the familiar “click’n’drag”
require special input that the user quick realizes
 General vs. action. A triangle, when
devices, which are not this mechanism after
application-dependent moved, shows realistic
generally available to all playing with the interface
metaphors; behavior, as if the user
users, restricting audience. for a few moments.
were dragging it with a
 Flexible and This limitation is
single finger at the cursor
composite metaphors unacceptable for our goals. 3.3 Instrument’s hot
position. Collision
vs. rigid metaphors. Therefore, the interface zones
detection is performed so
design had to cope with a
Real world metaphors are that triangles do not The specified interface is
one-handed input.
those based in things or overlap or the pencil tip supposed to be portable to
According to this fact, a
concepts pertaining to does not pass through most platforms, requiring
major issue is that the
common reality (e.g. triangle’s edges. only a one-button mouse,
interaction in the proposed
dentist) as opposed to non- which also contributes to
interface is through a 3.2 Highlighting and
real-world ones (e.g. easier operation. To
single mouse, while the snapping for precise achieve this, a “hot zone”
 concept was implemented interface as proposed in has some peculiarities, but perhaps, at the
for operating some this research: which would be better same time, too quick
drawing instruments. dealt with such an for some of their less
Their behavior depends on  Lack of intuitiveness: educational tool: skilled classmates. A
which part of them, or the feature-rich tool that allows each
zone, the user clicked on interfaces of today’s  Solving geometry student, outside class,
when selecting it. CAD and drawing exercises in a to review the
software requires blackboard requires resolutions of
The pencil/eraser has only training or a very great ability and exercises according to
three functionalities: to be efficient online help to precision, which are its own pace is
moved around the paper be operated effectively difficult to achieve essential in mitigating
sheet, to draw lines when by first time users, when using large, this problem.
it is dragged (if active) and leading to geometry clumsy wooden
to erase points, line and learner’s waste of time triangles and chalk 5. CONCLUSION
arcs, if dragged by the and facing of compass. Teaching in
eraser tip. Three “hot additional difficulties; computer rooms A new interface for a
zones” were mapped to demands replacing geometry drawing software
this object to implement  Excess of features: blackboard and chalk was presented. It is based
these operations, as shown suppose the instructor by whiteboard and on powerful interface-
in Table 1: wants the student to pen, making things related concepts like direct
practice how to worse due to the manipulation, concrete
Table 1: Pencil/eraser construct a circle whiteboard’s slippery metaphors, real-world
affordances tangent to a line and surface. Using a video metaphors, local tools and
to another circle, projector for composite tools.
Hot zone Action using ruler and
Lead Draw point or line demonstrating the
compass. Most CAD The main goals of this
Body Move without drawing geometry
software is able to interface are:
Eraser end Erases constructions on the
draw a solution to this proposed software  to be immediately
The compass has four problem with the user solves these problems, understandable, even
affordances, mapped as just selecting the adding to precision for first time and
shown in Table 2: circle tool and and clearness; occasional users,
clicking on the given
Table 2: Compass requiring no
line and circle. This is  Some geometry
instructions at all;
affordances not, of course, the way constructions spans
the instructor intended vertically in the sheet  to allow all possible
ot zone Action this geometry exercise and frequently compass-and-ruler
ad Pivot compass around needle
to be solved by the requires more space constructions to be
position apprentice; than it is available executed without
ad Arm Adjust Radius when drawn in the offering the powerful
edle Arm  Lack of practice with
Move compass without drawing blackboard. A commands usually
ndle Draws arc drawing instruments: computer projection available in drawing
conventional can be easily panned
The 45°- and 30-60°- software;
interfaces, with menus or zoomed to fit the
triangles have the same and buttons, are so far space on the screen;  to train apprentices in
behavior and feature only apart from real the use of drawing
one “hot zone”, drawing instruments,  Learning pace varies instruments in spite of
corresponding to its entire like compass and very much among using a virtual
body, which is used for ruler, that, by using students in the same environment;
moving them around or this interfaces only, class, in particular for
positioning them with the the students may subject matters like This interface will be
aid of the “snaps”. never learn how to Descriptive Geometry integrated into a drawing
draw parallel or which require spatial software for supporting
4. PROPOSED perpendicular lines by abilities, a skill known teaching of face-to-face
INTERFACE correctly manipulating to diverge a lot in the Geometry classes as well
BENEFITS drawing instruments – population (Gòrska et as distance learning
a necessary ability, as al., 1998). That fact courses. Dynamic
The introduction in this geometry will be
a computer is not demands careful
paper mentioned the incorporated in future
always at hand. explanations from the
following deficiencies in versions.
instructor, being
conventional graphic Besides reduction of those
sometimes boring to
software GUIs that would shortcomings, in-class 6. REFERENCES
some clever students
be overcome with an geometry teaching practice
BEDERSON, B. et al. Predictable, and Paulo, Brazil. He can be
(1996) Local Tools: An Controllable User reached by e-mail:
Alternative to Tool Interfaces. Proceedings of andre.luis@poli.usp.br.
Palettes. Proceedings of International Conference
the Symposium on User on Intelligent User 3. Leandro Lourenzoni is
Interface Software and Interfaces – IUI’97, an Electrical Engineering
Technology – UIST’96, Orlando, pp. 33-39. student at the Polytechnic
p.169-170, Seattle, ACM. School, University of São
VÄÄINÄNEN K.,
BUTLE, C. G.; AMANT, SCHMIDT J. (1994) User Paulo, Brazil. He can be
R. S. (2004) HabilisDraw Interfaces for Hypermedia: reached by e-mail:
DT: A Bimanual Tool- How to Find Good leandro.lourenzoni@poli.u
Based Direct Manipulation Metaphors? Conference sp.br.
Drawing Environment. on Human Factors in
ACM Conference on Computing Systems -
Human Factors in CHI’94 Adjunct
Computing Systems - Proceedings, ACM Press,
CHI’2004, short papers. pp. 263-264.
To appear.
ACKNOWLEDGEMEN
DAUGHTRY, J. M.;
TS
AMANT, R. S. (2003)
Power tools and composite We would like to thank
tools: integrating FAPESP for supporting
automation with direct this research through grant
manipulation. 03/04530-2.
Proceedings of the 2003
International Conference ABOUT THE
on Intelligent User AUTHORS
Interfaces, p.233-235,
Miami, Florida, ACM. 1. Eduardo T. Santos,
Ph.D., is an Assistant
DÜRSTELER, J. C. Professor in the
(2002) Affordances.
Department of Civil
Inf@Vis! The digital
magazine of InfoVis.net, Construction Engineering,
n.72, 14 Jan. 2002. Polytechnic School,
Available from: University of São Paulo,
<http://www.infovis.net/E- Brazil. His research
zine/2002/ num_72.htm>. interests are in Graphics
Accessed 12 apr. 2004. and Distance Education,
GÒRSKA, R.; LEOPOLD, Virtual Reality and
C.; SORBY, S.; SHIINA, Applications of IT to
K. (1998) International Construction. He can be
Comparisons of Gender reached by e-mail:
Differences in Spatial eduardo.toledo@poli.usp.b
Visualization and the r, by phone: +55-11-3091-
Effect of Graphics 5284 or through postal
Instruction on the address: Edifício de Eng.
Development of these Civil / Cidade
Skills. Proceedings of 8th Universitária / 05508-900
ICECGDG, Austin, São Paulo - SP / Brazil.
Texas, USA, pp. 261-266.
Website:
NORMAN, D. (2000) The http://toledo.pcc.usp.br
Design of Everyday
Things. MIT Press. 257p. 2. André Luís Lima de
Oliveira is a Civil
SHNEIDERMAN, B. Engineer and a Master’s
(1997). Direct student at the Polytechnic
Manipulation for
School, University of São
Comprehensible,