Software Engineering-The Golden Rules

In his book on interface design, Theo Mandel [MAN97] coins three “golden rules”: 1. Place the user in control. 2 . Reduce the user’s mem...

In his book on interface design, Theo Mandel [MAN97] coins three “golden rules”:
1. Place the user in control.
2. Reduce the user’s memory load.
3. Make the interface consistent.
These golden rules actually form the basis for a set of user interface design principles that guide this important software design activity.

Place the User in Control

During a requirements-gathering session for a major new information system, a key user was asked about the attributes of the window-oriented graphical interface. 

“What I really would like,” said the user solemnly, “is a system that reads my mind. It knows what I want to do before I need to do it and makes it very easy for me to getit done. That’s all, just that.”

My first reaction was to shake of my head and smile, but I paused for a moment. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the user’s request. She wanted a system that reacted to her needs and helped her get things done. She wanted to control the computer, not have the computer control her.

Most interface constraints and restrictions that are imposed by a designer are intended to simplify the mode of interaction. But for whom? In many cases, the designer might introduce constraints and limitations to simplify the implementation of the interface. The result may be an interface that is easy to build, but frustrating to use.

Mandel defines a number of design principles that allow the user to maintain control:

Define interaction modes in a way that does not force a user into unnecessary or undesired actions. An interaction mode is the current state of the interface. For example, if spell check is selected in a word-processor menu, the software moves to a spell checking mode. There is no reason to force the user to remain in spell checking mode if the user desires to make a small text edit along the way. The user should be able to enter and exit the mode with little or no effort.

Provide for flexible interaction. Because different users have different interaction preferences, choices should be provided. For example, software might allow a user to interact via keyboard commands, mouse movement, a digitizer pen, or voice recognition commands. But every action is not amenable to every interaction mechanism. Consider, for example, the difficulty of using keyboard command (or voice input) to draw a complex shape.

Allow user interaction to be interruptible and undoable. Even when involved in a sequence of actions, the user should be able to interrupt the sequence to do something else (without losing the work that had been done). The user should also be able to “undo” any action.

Streamline interaction as skill levels advance and allow the interaction to be customized. Users often find that they perform the same sequence of interactions repeatedly. It is worthwhile to design a “macro” mechanism that enables an advanced user to customize the interface to facilitate interaction.

Hide technical internals from the casual user. The user interface should move the user into the virtual world of the application. The user should not be aware of the operating system, file management functions, or other arcane computing technology. In essence, the interface should never require that the user interact at a level that is “inside” the machine (e.g., a user should never be required to type operating system commands from within application software).

Design for direct interaction with objects that appear on the screen. The user feels a sense of control when able to manipulate the objects that are necessary to perform a task in a manner similar to what would occur if the object were a physical thing. For example, an application interface that allows a user to “stretch” an object (scale it in size) is an implementation of direct manipulation.

Reduce the User’s Memory Load

The more a user has to remember, the more error-prone will be the interaction with the system. It is for this reason that a well-designed user interface does not tax the user’s memory. Whenever possible, the system should “remember” pertinent information and assist the user with an interaction scenario that assists recall. Mandel defines design principles that enable an interface to reduce the user’s memory load:

Reduce demand on short-term memory. When users are involved in complex tasks, the demand on short-term memory can be significant. The interface should be designed to reduce the requirement to remember past actions and results. This can be accomplished by providing visual cues that enable a user to recognize past actions, rather than having to recall them.

Establish meaningful defaults. The initial set of defaults should make sense for the average user, but a user should be able to specify individual preferences. However, a “reset” option should be available, enabling the redefinition of original default values.

Define shortcuts that are intuitive. When mnemonics are used to accomplish a system function (e.g., alt-P to invoke the print function), the mnemonic should be tied to the action in a way that is easy to remember (e.g., first letter of the task to be invoked).

The visual layout of the interface should be based on a real world metaphor. For example, a bill payment system should use a check book and check register metaphor to guide the user through the bill paying process. This enables the user to rely on well-understood visual cues, rather than memorizing an arcane interaction sequence.

Disclose information in a progressive fashion. The interface should be organized hierarchically. That is, information about a task, an object, or some behavior should be presented first at a high level of abstraction. More detail should be presented after the user indicates interest with a mouse pick. An example, common to many word-processing applications, is the underlining function. The function tself is one of a number of of functions under a text style menu. However, every underlining capability is not listed. The user must pick underlining, then all underlining options (e.g., single underline, double underline, dashed underline) are presented.

Make the Interface Consistent 

The interface should present and acquire information in a consistent fashion. This implies that (1) all visual information is organized according to a design standard that is maintained throughout all screen displays, (2) input mechanisms are constrained to a limited set that are used consistently throughout the application, and (3) mechanisms for navigating from task to task are consistently defined and implemented. Mandel  defines a set of design principles that help make the interface consistent:

Allow the user to put the current task into a meaningful context. Many nterfaces implement complex layers of interactions with dozens of screen images. It is important to provide indicators (e.g., window titles, graphical icons, consistent color coding) that enable the user to know the context of the work at hand. In addition, the user should be able to determine where he has come from and what alternatives exist for a transition to a new task.

Maintain consistency across a family of applications. A set of applications (or products) should all implement the same design rules so that consistency is maintained for all interaction.

If past interactive models have created user expectations, do not make changes unless there is a compelling reason to do so. Once a particular interactive sequence has become a de facto standard (e.g., the use of alt-S to save a file), the user expects this in every application he encounters. A change (e.g., using alt-S to invoke scaling) will cause confusion.

The interface design principles discussed in this and the preceding sections provide basic guidance for a software engineer. In the sections that follow, we examine the interface design process itself.