<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Semiotics: It&#8217;s a sign!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign</link>
	<description>docteur es sciences techniques (EPFL)</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:56:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ruth Stalker-Firth &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Cognitive Science: What makes your users tick</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-5474</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruth Stalker-Firth &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Cognitive Science: What makes your users tick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-5474</guid>
		<description>[...] it is no coincidence that Pierce himself defined a model for describing signs. He was interested in semiotics (the study of signs and symbols) as well as logic and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it is no coincidence that Pierce himself defined a model for describing signs. He was interested in semiotics (the study of signs and symbols) as well as logic and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ruth Stalker-Firth &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Using patterns to shape our world</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-5229</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruth Stalker-Firth &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Using patterns to shape our world</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-5229</guid>
		<description>[...] not just an easy-to-understand pattern but an icon of London. And like patterns, icons are part of semiotics - another subject borrowed by computing to create better [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] not just an easy-to-understand pattern but an icon of London. And like patterns, icons are part of semiotics - another subject borrowed by computing to create better [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cris</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator>Cris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 22:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/semiotics-its-a-sign#comment-232</guid>
		<description>RE: Swastika in Hinduism - it reminds me of the stares I got in Europe after returning from 4 weeks in South India, and one of the (ubiquitous, in India) plastic bags I was carrying with my luggage had the Hindu version of this symbol. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Bona-fide_use_causing_controversy

In my early days as a programmer at Apple, all GUI designs had to be approved by the in-house GUI guru, who purportedly had a degree in psychology. We software engineers (aka code monkeys) found that a bit hoitey toitey at the time. Later, I realized that the problems with GUIs and such were indeed the domain of psychologists/sociologists/semioticians. It is not an obvious problem to solve, and since most software involves interacting with a human, the problem is unavoidable.

A friend of mine has a Mac, but I haven't used them in years (since 2000). I was helping her with a DNS configuration problem, and I realized that Apple are still as dogmatic about GUI design as they were in the 80s and 90s. For example, when you click on the URL field in the Firefox browser on the Mac, it positions the cursor within the URL, without selecting anything. This is consistent behavior with the GUI as defined so long ago: a single click positions the cursor, a double-click selects the word under the cursor, and a triple-click selects the line. This was sacred behavior in the 80s and I see it is still supported by Apple, even with its current Unix-based OS. 

Try a single-click on the URL field of a Windows version of a browser and what happens? You get the whole URL selected, so you can easily change the whole thing, which is probably what most people do when they click. This is convenient, but much less consistent. I'm not sure such minor things really matter, since most users are able to adapt to these tiny inconsistencies in the GUI.

I wonder if Mac users are generally better at Pictionary than Windows users... :-P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: Swastika in Hinduism - it reminds me of the stares I got in Europe after returning from 4 weeks in South India, and one of the (ubiquitous, in India) plastic bags I was carrying with my luggage had the Hindu version of this symbol. Read more here: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Bona-fide_use_causing_controversy" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Bona-fide_use_causing_controversy</a></p>
<p>In my early days as a programmer at Apple, all GUI designs had to be approved by the in-house GUI guru, who purportedly had a degree in psychology. We software engineers (aka code monkeys) found that a bit hoitey toitey at the time. Later, I realized that the problems with GUIs and such were indeed the domain of psychologists/sociologists/semioticians. It is not an obvious problem to solve, and since most software involves interacting with a human, the problem is unavoidable.</p>
<p>A friend of mine has a Mac, but I haven&#8217;t used them in years (since 2000). I was helping her with a DNS configuration problem, and I realized that Apple are still as dogmatic about GUI design as they were in the 80s and 90s. For example, when you click on the URL field in the Firefox browser on the Mac, it positions the cursor within the URL, without selecting anything. This is consistent behavior with the GUI as defined so long ago: a single click positions the cursor, a double-click selects the word under the cursor, and a triple-click selects the line. This was sacred behavior in the 80s and I see it is still supported by Apple, even with its current Unix-based OS. </p>
<p>Try a single-click on the URL field of a Windows version of a browser and what happens? You get the whole URL selected, so you can easily change the whole thing, which is probably what most people do when they click. This is convenient, but much less consistent. I&#8217;m not sure such minor things really matter, since most users are able to adapt to these tiny inconsistencies in the GUI.</p>
<p>I wonder if Mac users are generally better at Pictionary than Windows users&#8230; <img src='http://www.ruthstalkerfirth.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':-P' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
