Thread: "5D interface"

Hi,

I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface, apparently I wante=
d to do more than I am willing, so I'm writing the quick form here and you =
can ask questions if I'm unclear.=20

My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen to attend=
to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point, but...) There IS a way =
to change the interface to help with this, while still maintaining the esse=
nce of the puzzle.

When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my mind of =
how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing happened! Sure, the th=
ing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in the same relative positions to ea=
ch other. I would have had to look elsewhere to see the manipulations I cau=
sed.=20=20

Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face and you'll=
get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your puzzle.

Hope that helps

--0016363b99c80d5c89047bfed628
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Kyle,

By "Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face", I
figure you mean "Change it so that clicking a face alters the *stickers *in
that face". This is an interesting idea. It might be good to use Rubik's
TouchCube for analogies.
There, you can drag your finger along a row of stickers in a face to define
a twist of an adjacent face (one that your fingers did not touch). As
you're pointing out, this is in contrast with MC5D, where you "drag" the
sticker of one 2C piece to the sticker of another 2C piece, twisting the
face containing the stickers.

So I definitely think there is "some there there" in your suggestion, but I
also think it is not close to clearly defined yet, and a lot would need to
be worked out to make it viable. The main issue is that there are so many
possible twists to choose from, and a single twist needs to be fully
specified by what the user clicks (this was a difficult aspect in coming up
with the current workable interface). Without having really thought
it through, here are some off the cuff questions which might help direct
ideas:

(1) Which type of cubie(s) will the user need to click? Right now in MC5D,
it is only 2C cubies. In the TouchCube, it is a corner/edge/corner.
(2) How many cubies does the user need to click? MC5D: 2, TouchCube: 3.
(3) How to define which face to twist? Currently, it is the face containing
the clicked stickers. In the TouchCube, it is the only other face sharing
all the specified cubies.
(4) Can this be done such that the complete set of twists are available? We
need the coordinate-axis-aligned twists at a minimum, and there are 12 of
these per face.

I think a good goal is to keep the number of clicks to a minimum. My guess
is that a new approach along the lines of this suggestion could likely
require 3 or even 4 clicks, but I'm not sure. If so, that is a big downside
in my opinion to the 2 clicks we have now. I still occasionally wonder if
there might be some magical way to specify a twist with one click, and I'd
love it if someone could figure out how. The specification is much more
difficult than the coding!

Take Care,
Roice

P.S. A relevant historical post on this is
here.
Scroll down to the section titled "User Interface for the Twists"...


On 12/30/09, kygron wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface, apparently I
> wanted to do more than I am willing, so I'm writing the quick form here and
> you can ask questions if I'm unclear.
>
> My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen to attend
> to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point, but...) There IS a way to
> change the interface to help with this, while still maintaining the essence
> of the puzzle.
>
> When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my mind of
> how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing happened! Sure, the
> thing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in the same relative positions to
> each other. I would have had to look elsewhere to see the manipulations I
> caused.
>
> Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face and you'll
> get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your puzzle.
>
> Hope that helps
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--0016363b99c80d5c89047bfed628
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I don't have a full answer to this question but I feel like I might be
able to put some constraints on its answer. I think that what we're
hoping for is a 1-click UI that performs a natural twist, and ideally
one that extends to N-dimensions. I also don't think that we want a UI
similar to the TouchCube because that seems particularly awkward to me.
People seem to like the MC4D twisting UI and I think that a goal should
be for the basic MC4D twist UI to fall out of an N-D definition. Given a
basic twist, I bet that we can find appropriate modifier keys and other
variations on it to let us reach all positions and face reorientations,
but that goal should be secondary to finding a good basic twist UI
definition.

The constraint that I suggest that we work with is that a twisting click
on a sticker should always identify two special N-D points: The center
of the cubie containing the clicked sticker, and the center of the face
containing the sticker. The twist should define a rotation that leaves
these two points unmoved while rotating the selected face (plus one
slice of all neighboring faces) in a direction controlled by which mouse
button was clicked, such that the twisting stops at the first point
where the geometry of the puzzle is identical to when it started. IOW,
when the face first snaps into a new legal position. Any stickers that
can not provide any such rotation that changes the state of the puzzle
would not identify a "grip".

What I don't know is how many different kinds of rotations will satisfy
these constraints in N-dimensions. The above may not provide enough
constraints in that some stickers might be capable of identifying more
than one grip, but I feel as if looking at the problem this way might
give us a start on finding a natural and usable N-D 1-click twist UI
definition.

-Melinda

Roice Nelson wrote:
>
>
> Hi Kyle,
>
> By "Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face",
> I figure you mean "Change it so that clicking a face alters the
> */stickers/ *in that face". This is an interesting idea. It might be
> good to use Rubik's TouchCube
> for analogies. There,
> you can drag your finger along a row of stickers in a face to define a
> twist of an adjacent face (one that your fingers did not touch). As
> you're pointing out, this is in contrast with MC5D, where you "drag"
> the sticker of one 2C piece to the sticker of another 2C piece,
> twisting the face containing the stickers.
>
> So I definitely think there is "some there there" in your suggestion,
> but I also think it is not close to clearly defined yet, and a lot
> would need to be worked out to make it viable. The main issue is that
> there are so many possible twists to choose from, and a single twist
> needs to be fully specified by what the user clicks (this was a
> difficult aspect in coming up with the current workable interface).
> Without having really thought it through, here are some off the cuff
> questions which might help direct ideas:
>
> (1) Which type of cubie(s) will the user need to click? Right now in
> MC5D, it is only 2C cubies. In the TouchCube, it is a corner/edge/corner.
> (2) How many cubies does the user need to click? MC5D: 2, TouchCube: 3.
> (3) How to define which face to twist? Currently, it is the face
> containing the clicked stickers. In the TouchCube, it is the only
> other face sharing all the specified cubies.
> (4) Can this be done such that the complete set of twists are
> available? We need the coordinate-axis-aligned twists at a minimum,
> and there are 12 of these per face.
>
> I think a good goal is to keep the number of clicks to a minimum. My
> guess is that a new approach along the lines of this suggestion could
> likely require 3 or even 4 clicks, but I'm not sure. If so, that is a
> big downside in my opinion to the 2 clicks we have now. I still
> occasionally wonder if there might be some magical way to specify a
> twist with one click, and I'd love it if someone could figure out
> how. The specification is much more difficult than the coding!
>
> Take Care,
> Roice
>
> P.S. A relevant historical post on this is here
> . Scroll
> down to the section titled "User Interface for the Twists"...
>
>
> On 12/30/09, *kygron* > wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface,
> apparently I wanted to do more than I am willing, so I'm writing
> the quick form here and you can ask questions if I'm unclear.
>
> My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen
> to attend to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point,
> but...) There IS a way to change the interface to help with this,
> while still maintaining the essence of the puzzle.
>
> When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my
> mind of how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing
> happened! Sure, the thing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in
> the same relative positions to each other. I would have had to
> look elsewhere to see the manipulations I caused.
>
> Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face
> and you'll get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your
> puzzle.
>
> Hope that helps
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> 4D_Cubing-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

=C2=A0



=20=20


=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20=20=20
I don't have a full answer to this question but I feel like I might b=
e=20

able to put some constraints on its answer. I think that what we're=20

hoping for is a 1-click UI that performs a natural twist, and ideally=20

one that extends to N-dimensions. I also don't think that we want a UI=20

similar to the TouchCube because that seems particularly awkward to me.=20

People seem to like the MC4D twisting UI and I think that a goal should=20

be for the basic MC4D twist UI to fall out of an N-D definition. Given a=20

basic twist, I bet that we can find appropriate modifier keys and other=20

variations on it to let us reach all positions and face reorientations,=20

but that goal should be secondary to finding a good basic twist UI=20

definition.



The constraint that I suggest that we work with is that a twisting click=20

on a sticker should always identify two special N-D points: The center=20

of the cubie containing the clicked sticker, and the center of the face=20

containing the sticker. The twist should define a rotation that leaves=20

these two points unmoved while rotating the selected face (plus one=20

slice of all neighboring faces) in a direction controlled by which mouse=20

button was clicked, such that the twisting stops at the first point=20

where the geometry of the puzzle is identical to when it started. IOW,=20

when the face first snaps into a new legal position. Any stickers that=20

can not provide any such rotation that changes the state of the puzzle=20

would not identify a "grip".



What I don't know is how many different kinds of rotations will satisfy=20

these constraints in N-dimensions. The above may not provide enough=20

constraints in that some stickers might be capable of identifying more=20

than one grip, but I feel as if looking at the problem this way might=20

give us a start on finding a natural and usable N-D 1-click twist UI=20

definition.



-Melinda



Roice Nelson wrote:

>

>

> Hi Kyle,

>=20=20

> By "Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face",=20

> I figure you mean "Change it so that clicking a face alters the=20

> */stickers/ *in that face". This is an interesting idea. It might be=20

> good to use Rubik's TouchCube=20

> for analogies. There,=
=20

> you can drag your finger along a row of stickers in a face to define a=20

> twist of an adjacent face (one that your fingers did not touch). As=20

> you're pointing out, this is in contrast with MC5D, where you "drag"=20

> the sticker of one 2C piece to the sticker of another 2C piece,=20

> twisting the face containing the stickers.

>=20=20

> So I definitely think there is "some there there" in your suggestion,=20

> but I also think it is not close to clearly defined yet, and a lot=20

> would need to be worked out to make it viable. The main issue is that=20

> there are so many possible twists to choose from, and a single twist=20

> needs to be fully specified by what the user clicks (this was a=20

> difficult aspect in coming up with the current workable interface).=20

> Without having really thought it through, here are some off the cuff=20

> questions which might help direct ideas:

>=20=20

> (1) Which type of cubie(s) will the user need to click? Right now in=20

> MC5D, it is only 2C cubies. In the TouchCube, it is a corner/edge/ corne=
r.

> (2) How many cubies does the user need to click? MC5D: 2, TouchCube: 3.

> (3) How to define which face to twist? Currently, it is the face=20

> containing the clicked stickers. In the TouchCube, it is the only=20

> other face sharing all the specified cubies.

> (4) Can this be done such that the complete set of twists are=20

> available? We need the coordinate-axis- aligned twists at a minimum,=20

> and there are 12 of these per face.

>=20=20

> I think a good goal is to keep the number of clicks to a minimum. My=20

> guess is that a new approach along the lines of this suggestion could=20

> likely require 3 or even 4 clicks, but I'm not sure. If so, that is a=20

> big downside in my opinion to the 2 clicks we have now. I still=20

> occasionally wonder if there might be some magical way to specify a=20

> twist with one click, and I'd love it if someone could figure out=20

> how. The specification is much more difficult than the coding!

>=20=20

> Take Care,

> Roice

>=20=20

> P.S. A relevant historical post on this is here=20

> . Scroll=
=20

> down to the section titled "User Interface for the Twists"...

>

>=20=20

> On 12/30/09, *kygron* > wrot=
e:

>

> Hi,

>

> I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface,

> apparently I wanted to do more than I am willing, so I'm writing

> the quick form here and you can ask questions if I'm unclear.

>

> My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen

> to attend to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point,

> but...) There IS a way to change the interface to help with this,

> while still maintaining the essence of the puzzle.

>

> When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my

> mind of how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing

> happened! Sure, the thing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in

> the same relative positions to each other. I would have had to

> look elsewhere to see the manipulations I caused.

>

> Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face

> and you'll get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your

> puzzle.

>

> Hope that helps

>

>

>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

> 4D_Cubing-fullfeatu red@yahoogroups. com

>

>

>

>

>

>

>=20



=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20=20

=20=20=20=20
=20=20=20=20


=20



=20=20






=20=20=20=20=20=20
--0-1278901241-1262270314=:52748
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

top" style=3D"font: inherit;"> Hi everyone, >I thought I would give my own brief thoughts on the concept of a 1-click t= wist user interface for MC5D and higher-dimensional cubes.  In orde= r to define a unique twist of a 4-dimensional face in MC5D, we need to s= pecify two different coordinates relative to the center sticker of that = face, so that we have two axes, or a "plane of rotation" about which a 9= 0-degree rotation could be defined.  Let us consider an interface a= nalogous to the tesseract in MC4D, in which a 2-dimensional face of the = 3-dimensional face of stickers is selected (by clicking a 2-colored piece s= ticker), and then rotated either clockwise or counter-clockwise.  I= n MC5D, we would have to select a 3-dimensional face of stickers, of whi= ch there are eight, and then specify one of six axes to rotate that 3-dimensional face around, which defines the rotation of the 4-dimensio= nal face completely.  In the 3^5 cube, I do not believe a natural t= wist with a single click exists because if we were to click a 2-colored pie= ce sticker, that would not provide enough information to define a twist= (we would have specified a 3-dimensional face, but not how to rotate i= t).  If we click a 3, 4, or 5-colored piece, the problem is that ea= ch of these pieces belongs to multiple 3-dimensional faces, so we have n= ot defined a unique 4-dimensional rotation. On 5^5 cubes and larger = 5-dimensional cubes it would be possible, because we can click 2-colored= piece stickers which define both the 3-dimensional face and the axis ar= ound which to rotate it.  However, using a single click is, in my opin= ion, a bit too unnatural and complex.  It would be much simpler to = use two clicks, and I believe Roice's solution to this is better than the analogous one from MC4D I described above, as in 5 dimensions it would = be difficult to predict how the face would rotate around the two axes, w= hile as MC5D is set up, one can see where the pieces are going to move t= o. Considering higher-dimensional cubes, we would need more axes of = rotation, so that the method analogous to MC4D I described above would u= se three clicks for a 6-dimensional cube, four clicks for a 7-dimensiona= l cube, etc.  In theory a 1-click solution might be possible for ma= ny sizes and dimensions, but only by using an unnatural and abstract met= hod. All the best, David --- On Thu, 12/31/09, Melinda = Green <melinda@superliminal.com> wrote: le=3D"border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-le= ft: 5px;"> From: Melinda Green <melinda@superliminal.com> Subje= ct: Re: [MC4D] 5D interface To: 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, December 31, 2009, 2:27 AM   =20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20 I don't have a full answer to this question but I feel like I migh= t be able to put some constraints on its answer. I think that what we're hoping for is a 1-click UI that performs a natural twist, and = ideally one that extends to N-dimensions. I also don't think that we want a UI similar to the TouchCube because that seems particularly awkward to me. > People seem to like the MC4D twisting UI and I think that a goal should > be for the basic MC4D twist UI to fall out of an N-D definition. Given a r> basic twist, I bet that we can find appropriate modifier keys and other > variations on it to let us reach all positions and face reorientations, > but that goal should be secondary to finding a good basic twist UI definition. The constraint that I suggest that we work with is that a twisting click r> on a sticker should always identify two special N-D points: The center of the cubie containing the clicked sticker, and the center of the face > containing the sticker. The twist should define a rotation that leaves these two points unmoved while rotating the selected face (plus one slice of all neighboring faces) in a direction controlled by which mouse r> button was clicked, such that the twisting stops at the first point where the geometry of the puzzle is identical to when it started. IOW, when the face first snaps into a new legal position. Any stickers that can not provide any such rotation that changes the state of the puzzle would not identify a "grip". What I don't know is how many different kinds of rotations will satisfy > these constraints in N-dimensions. The above may not provide enough constraints in that some stickers might be capable of identifying more than one grip, but I feel as if looking at the problem this way might give us a start on finding a natural and usable N-D 1-click twist UI definition. -Melinda Roice Nelson wrote: > > > Hi Kyle, > > By "Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face",= > I figure you mean "Change it so that clicking a face alters the > */stickers/ *in that face". This is an interesting idea. It might be= > good to use Rubik's TouchCube > <om/watch?v=3DwaY_evu6D_Y">http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=3DwaY_evu6D_ Ya>> for analogies. There, > you can drag your finger along a row of stickers in a face to define a= > twist of an adjacent face (one that your fingers did not touch). As <= br> > you're pointing out, this is in contrast with MC5D, where you "drag" <= br> > the sticker of one 2C piece to the sticker of another 2C piece, > twisting the face containing the stickers. > > So I definitely think there is "some there there" in your suggestion, = > but I also think it is not close to clearly defined yet, and a lot > > would need to be worked out to make it viable. The main issue is that= > there are so many possible twists to choose from, and a single twist <= br> > needs to be fully specified by what the user clicks (this was a > difficult aspect in coming up with the current workable interface). r> > Without having really thought it through, here are some off the cuff = > questions which might help direct ideas: > > (1) Which type of cubie(s) will the user need to click? Right now in = > MC5D, it is only 2C cubies. In the TouchCube, it is a corner/edge/ co= rner. > (2) How many cubies does the user need to click? MC5D: 2, TouchCube: = 3. > (3) How to define which face to twist? Currently, it is the face > containing the clicked stickers. In the TouchCube, it is the only > other face sharing all the specified cubies. > (4) Can this be done such that the complete set of twists are > available? We need the coordinate-axis- aligned twists at a minimum, = > and there are 12 of these per face. > > I think a good goal is to keep the number of clicks to a minimum. My = > guess is that a new approach along the lines of this suggestion could = > likely require 3 or even 4 clicks, but I'm not sure. If so, that is a= > big downside in my opinion to the 2 clicks we have now. I still > occasionally wonder if there might be some magical way to specify a r> > twist with one click, and I'd love it if someone could figure out > how. The specification is much more difficult than the coding! > > Take Care, > Roice > > P.S. A relevant historical post on this is here > <yahoo.com/group/4D_Cubing/message/234">http://games. groups.yahoo. com/grou= p/ 4D_Cubing/ message/234>. Scroll > down to the section titled "User Interface for the Twists"... > > > On 12/30/09, *kygron* <kygron@yahoo. com &l= t;mailto:kygron@yahoo. com>> wrote: > > Hi, > > I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface, > apparently I wanted to do more than I am willing, so I'm writingr> > the quick form here and you can ask questions if I'm unclear. > > My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen<= br> > to attend to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point, > but...) There IS a way to change the interface to help with this,<= br> > while still maintaining the essence of the puzzle. > > When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my= > mind of how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing > happened! Sure, the thing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in> > the same relative positions to each other. I would have had to > look elsewhere to see the manipulations I caused. > > Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that facer> > and you'll get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your> > puzzle. > > Hope that helps > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > 4D_Cubing-fullfeatu red@yahoogroups. com> > <mailto:4D_Cubing-fullfeatu red@yahoogroups= . com> > > > > > > =20=20=20=20=20 =20

=20=20=20=20=20=20
--0-1278901241-1262270314=:52748--

yeah, that's the discussion that was going on in my head and specifics and =
clarity where the reasons holding back from posting. I have a better idea..=
. you are all intelligent people and interested in the topic, I bet if I st=
umble through an abstract description you'll figure it out.

I'll start with MC4D, 'cause I really wanna play with the new polytopes, an=
d you can extrapolate to 5D (prob'ly with an additional click).

When working with MC4D for my solution, I always went to the opposite 4face=
and clicked to rotate in the opposite direction (alternately, the opposite=
slice, anyway, two opposites).

Remember, there's a difference between simulation and interface. You don't =
click a cubie, you click a button on the screen. In MC4D you click a sticky=
, but there's no reason why you can't click the edge of a sticky, or a visu=
ally distinct "handle" for an entire n-face.

Complete 3^4 1-click instant gratification interface:

3 mouse buttons
left-click
right-click
translate-click

3 slices, as standard

the interface is a 3x3 "face" of a 4-face viewed as a 3^3. Call it the boar=
d for now. this is slice 1, any work with alternate slices requires a slice=
button.

translate-click board center: entire 4face translates toward board (adjac=
ent 4face rotates all slices from perpendicular)=20

left/right-click board center: board rotates (opposite 4face rotates oppo=
site direction)

translate-click board edge: board translates in direction of edge-from-ce=
nter (opposite 4face rotates from perpendicular)

left/right-click a board edge: nothing
any-click a board corner: nothing
=20
that's everything you need! you can even avoid the slice masks altogether i=
f you allow edge-of-sticky clicking. each board boundary defines one board-=
slice and direction for translating. rotate-click a board edge for a board-=
slice rotation.

basically, think of a mouse click as a finger pushing from the origin (or n=
-face origin)


I hope that wasn't too confusing for you formal-minded folks ;)

Kyle

--- In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, "kygron" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>=20
> I said a while ago that I would critic the 5D interface, apparently I wan=
ted to do more than I am willing, so I'm writing the quick form here and yo=
u can ask questions if I'm unclear.=20
>=20
> My problem is one of attention. There's too many things on screen to atte=
nd to all of them at once. (I know, that's the point, but...) There IS a wa=
y to change the interface to help with this, while still maintaining the es=
sence of the puzzle.
>=20
> When I started the puzzle, I picked a (5)face, got a picture in my mind o=
f how it looked, clicked a few cubies, and.... nothing happened! Sure, the =
thing rotated, but all the cubies stayed in the same relative positions to =
each other. I would have had to look elsewhere to see the manipulations I c=
aused.=20=20
>=20
> Change it so that clicking a face alters the cubies in that face and you'=
ll get alot more people able to enjoy manipulating your puzzle.
>=20
> Hope that helps
>