skip to main content
10.1145/1520340.1520563acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Exploring the design of accessible goal crossing desktop widgets

Published:04 April 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

Prior work has shown that goal crossing may be a more accessible interaction technique than conventional pointing-and-clicking for motor-impaired users. Although goal crossing with pen-based input devices has been studied, pen-based designs have limited applicability on the desktop because the pen can "fly in," cross, and "fly out," whereas a persistent mouse cursor cannot. We therefore explore possible designs for accessible mouse-based goal crossing widgets that avoid triggering unwanted goals by using secondary goals, gestures, and corners and edges. We identify four design principles for accessible desktop goal crossing widgets: ease of use for motor-impaired users, safety from false selections, efficiency, and scalability.

References

  1. Accot, J. and Zhai, S. (1997) Beyond Fitts' law: Models for trajectory-based HCI tasks. Proc. ACM CHI'97. New York: ACM Press, 295--302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Accot, J. and Zhai, S. (2002) More than dotting the i's -- Foundations for crossing-based interfaces. Proc. ACM CHI '02. New York: ACM Press, 73--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Apitz, G. and Guimbretière, F. (2004) CrossY: A crossing-based drawing application. Proc. ACM UIST '04. New York: ACM Press, 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Frank, A. (2005) DontClick.It Diploma project in Communication Design, University of Essen-Duisburg, Essen, Germany. http://www.dontclick.itGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Grossman, T., Hinckley, K., Baudisch, P., Agrawala, M. and Balakrishnan, R. (2006) Hover Widgets: Using the tracking state to extend the capabilities of pen-operated devices. Proc. ACM CHI '06. New York: ACM Press, 861--870. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P. and Clarkson, J. (2004) Mouse movements of motion-impaired users: A submovement analysis. Proc. ACM ASSETS '04. New York: ACM Press, 102--109. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Trewin, S. and Pain, H. (1999) Keyboard and mouse errors due to motor disabilities. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 50 (2), 109--144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Wobbrock, J.O. and Gajos, K.Z. (2008) Goal crossing with mice and trackballs for people with motor impairments: Performance, submovements, and design directions. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 1 (1), 4:1--4:37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Exploring the design of accessible goal crossing desktop widgets

    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
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '09: CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2009
      2470 pages
      ISBN:9781605582474
      DOI:10.1145/1520340

      Copyright © 2009 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s)

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 April 2009

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • extended-abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '09 Paper Acceptance Rate385of1,130submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader