Tangible User Interfaces: Classification
Available from diuf.unifr.ch
Page 1
Tangible User Interfaces: Classification
Tangible User Interfaces
- Classification -
University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Philipp Locher
philipp.locher@unifr.ch
3rd February 2006
Abstract
This paper summaries the classification framework for Tangible User Inter-
faces that was presented by Ullmer and Ishii and later extended by Hoven
and Eggen.
1 Introduction
The number of application of Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) has been
growing over the last few years. Although there are just a few applications
which are commercially available it is obvious that TUIs are an alternative
to the traditional Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) to bridge the gap be-
tween the digital and the physical world. To break down the rank growth
Ullmer and Ishii have presented a model to classify TUIs in 2000. They did
some minor changes on the model in 2001 but the base framework of the
characterisation of tangible interfaces has remained the same and reached a
grand acceptance.
The classification model presented by Ullmer and Ishii has been extended
by Hoven and Eggen in 2004 for their work with associative TUIs and per-
sonal objects.
This paper gives an overview of the classification of TUIs. The frame-
work as well as the extension are introduced. At the end an alternative
model based on application domains is briefly presented.
As it is just a short report focused on the classification, it is expected that
the reader is familiar with the different instances of Tangible User Interfaces
which have already been developed.
There are no specific references as the whole report is fully based on four
papers which are listed at the end.
1
- Classification -
University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Philipp Locher
philipp.locher@unifr.ch
3rd February 2006
Abstract
This paper summaries the classification framework for Tangible User Inter-
faces that was presented by Ullmer and Ishii and later extended by Hoven
and Eggen.
1 Introduction
The number of application of Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) has been
growing over the last few years. Although there are just a few applications
which are commercially available it is obvious that TUIs are an alternative
to the traditional Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) to bridge the gap be-
tween the digital and the physical world. To break down the rank growth
Ullmer and Ishii have presented a model to classify TUIs in 2000. They did
some minor changes on the model in 2001 but the base framework of the
characterisation of tangible interfaces has remained the same and reached a
grand acceptance.
The classification model presented by Ullmer and Ishii has been extended
by Hoven and Eggen in 2004 for their work with associative TUIs and per-
sonal objects.
This paper gives an overview of the classification of TUIs. The frame-
work as well as the extension are introduced. At the end an alternative
model based on application domains is briefly presented.
As it is just a short report focused on the classification, it is expected that
the reader is familiar with the different instances of Tangible User Interfaces
which have already been developed.
There are no specific references as the whole report is fully based on four
papers which are listed at the end.
1
Page 2
2 Terminology
Most of the terms in the context of Tangible User Interfaces have not reached
a widespread consensus yet. As a well defined terminology is important –
and common for scientific areas – especially to characterise a system, the
following terminology should be considered:
Iconic and symbolic The difference between iconic and symbolic signs is
the fact that iconic signs share some representational properties with
the objects they refer to. This is not the case for symbolic signs. For
example representing a person with a shape of the form of a head
would be iconic. On the other hand representing a person with a
form of an apple would be symbolic as an apple shares definitely no
representational properties with a person. Phicons is the short form
for physical icons and beside their existence in the physical world they
are similar to GUI icons.
Tokens and reference frame Tokens are the physical elements which can
be manipulated and used in the so called reference frame or physical
interaction space. For example in the Bricks system the bricks are the
tokens and the ActiveDesk is the reference frame.
Containers and tools Containers and tools are both subsets of tokens.
Containers are symbolic tokens to which media can be assigned. A
perfect example therefore are the mediaBlocks. Tokens which repre-
sent digital operations or functions are called tools. The ”wind tool”
in the Urp system serves as an example.
3 Key Characteristics
Before talking about the key characteristics of TUIs the interaction model
for tangible interfaces – the so called ”model-control-representation (physi-
Figure 1: GUI and TUI interaction models.
2
Most of the terms in the context of Tangible User Interfaces have not reached
a widespread consensus yet. As a well defined terminology is important –
and common for scientific areas – especially to characterise a system, the
following terminology should be considered:
Iconic and symbolic The difference between iconic and symbolic signs is
the fact that iconic signs share some representational properties with
the objects they refer to. This is not the case for symbolic signs. For
example representing a person with a shape of the form of a head
would be iconic. On the other hand representing a person with a
form of an apple would be symbolic as an apple shares definitely no
representational properties with a person. Phicons is the short form
for physical icons and beside their existence in the physical world they
are similar to GUI icons.
Tokens and reference frame Tokens are the physical elements which can
be manipulated and used in the so called reference frame or physical
interaction space. For example in the Bricks system the bricks are the
tokens and the ActiveDesk is the reference frame.
Containers and tools Containers and tools are both subsets of tokens.
Containers are symbolic tokens to which media can be assigned. A
perfect example therefore are the mediaBlocks. Tokens which repre-
sent digital operations or functions are called tools. The ”wind tool”
in the Urp system serves as an example.
3 Key Characteristics
Before talking about the key characteristics of TUIs the interaction model
for tangible interfaces – the so called ”model-control-representation (physi-
Figure 1: GUI and TUI interaction models.
2
Sign up today - FREE
Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research. Learn more
- All your research in one place
- Add and import papers easily
- Access it anywhere, anytime
Start using Mendeley in seconds!
Readership Statistics
2 Readers on Mendeley
by Discipline
by Academic Status
50% Doctoral Student
50% Ph.D. Student
by Country
50% Japan
50% Germany