[Gzz-commits] manuscripts/Paper paper.tex

[Tuomas J. Lukka]

CVSROOT:        /cvsroot/gzz
Module name:    manuscripts
Changes by:     Tuomas J. Lukka <address@hidden>        03/03/31 09:10:42

Modified files:
        Paper          : paper.tex 

Log message:
        More

CVSWeb URLs:
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/gzz/manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex.diff?tr1=1.91&tr2=1.92&r1=text&r2=text

Patches:
Index: manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex
diff -u manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex:1.91 manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex:1.92
--- manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex:1.91    Mon Mar 31 09:06:02 2003
+++ manuscripts/Paper/paper.tex Mon Mar 31 09:10:42 2003
@@ -702,6 +702,15 @@
 % relatively small basis size, not to have too many features. XXX why?
 
 
+An important point is generating the backgrounds is that
+the texture appearance should have no correlation with any attribute 
+or content of the document 
+so that the textures of any two important files 
+are similar only by chance.
+Having any semantics encoded in the texture
+would prohibit orthogonal structures with differing semantics
+of the same content.
+
 \section{Hardware-accelerated implementation}
 
 In this section, we discuss our hardware-accelerated implementation
@@ -1175,32 +1184,12 @@
 \end{figure*}
 
 \section{Experiences, evaluation}
-It can be argued that
-the backgrounds clutter the display
-visually, making the user interface more confusing,
-and may not even be helpful.
-Indeed, many aspects of the system are a compromise between
-recognizability and other goals such as readability, rendering
-performance, or user comfortability.
-
-Overall, we feel that the backgrounds can greatly improve user orientation,
-enabling more efficient views to hyperstructured content, and
-therefore the benefits outweigh the costs.
 In the following, we evaluate the implications and tradeoffs 
 of different
 aspects in the use of unique backround textures.  
 
 \subsection{Overall appearance of the resulting textures}
 
-The most important point is generating the backgrounds is that
-the texture appearance should have no correlation with any attribute 
-or content of the document 
-so that the textures of any two important files 
-are similar only by chance.
-Having any semantics encoded in the texture
-would prohibit orthogonal structures with differing semantics
-of the same content.
-
 %The background textures should be be recognizable at different scales.
 Although texture perception is scale-independent to some extent,
 the display resolution and certain spatial interactions 
@@ -1216,7 +1205,7 @@
 with the current implementation,
 but only the more modest goal of zooming within a range 
 that would be reasonable for a single PDF document, 
-i.e., approximately 100-fold
+i.e., approximately 10-fold
 difference between mininum and maximum zoom. 
 % This is in line with our
 % intended use, since it would be unreasonable 
@@ -1606,6 +1595,19 @@
 distinct symbols can be used...
 
 Visualizing a discrete variable with unordered values
+
+
+It can be argued that
+the backgrounds clutter the display
+visually, making the user interface more confusing,
+and may not even be helpful.
+Indeed, many aspects of the system are a compromise between
+recognizability and other goals such as readability, rendering
+performance, or user comfortability.
+
+Overall, however, we feel that the backgrounds can greatly improve user 
orientation,
+enabling more efficient views to hyperstructured content, and
+therefore the benefits outweigh the costs.
 
 
 \section{Acknowledgments}