Advertisement

Avoiding Inaccuracies in Task Models

  • Thomas Lachaume
  • Patrick GirardEmail author
  • Laurent Guittet
  • Allan Fousse
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9731)

Abstract

In the field of user-centered design of interactive systems, task models play a major role, especially in defining requirements, or during the system validation phase. They lean on precise semantics, based on a set of formal operators. In this article, we demonstrate how the addition of new description tools (pre-conditions, objects) introduced ambiguities in model interpretation, and we propose our solutions to solve this problem.

Keywords

Task models User-centered design 

References

  1. 1.
    Baron, M., Lucquiaud, V., Autard, D., Scapin, D.: K-MADe : un environnement pour le noyau du modèle de description de l’activité IHM 2006, pp. 287–288. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caffiau, S., Scapin, D., Girard, P., Baron, M., Jambon, F.: Increasing the expressive power of task analysis: systematic comparison and empirical assessment of tool-supported task models. Interact. Comput. 22(6), 569–593 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Diaper, D., Stanton, N.A.: The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gamboa, R.F., Scapin, D.L., Hansmann, W., Hewitt, W.T., Purgathofer, W.: Editing MAD* task description for specifying user interfaces, at both semantic and presentation levels. In: Harrison, M.D., Torres, Jc (eds.) Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems DSV-IS 1997, pp. 193–208. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kieras, D.E.: GOMS models for task analysis. In: Diaper, D., Stanton, N. (eds.) The Handbook of Task Analysis, pp. 83–116 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martinie, C.: Une approche à base de modèles synergiques pour la prise en compte simultanée de l’utilisabilité, la fiabilité et l’opérabilité des systèmes interactifs critiques, p. 236 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paternò, F., Mancini, C., Meniconi, S.: Concurtasktrees: a diagrammatic notation for specifying task models. In: Howard, S., Hammond, J., Lindgaard, G. (eds.) Human-Computer Interaction Conference INTERACT 1997, pp. 362–369. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scapin, D.L., Pierret-Golbreich, C.: Towards a method for task description: MAD. In: Berliguet, L., Berthelette, D. (eds.) Working with display units, pp. 371–380. Elsevier Science Publishers, North-Holland (1990)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sebillote, S.: Task analysis and formalization according to MAD: Hierarchical task analysis, method of data gathering and examples of task description (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sinnig, D., Wurdel, M., Forbrig, P., Chalin, P., Khendek, F.: Task Models and Diagrams for User Interface Design. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Systems, I.S.O.I.P. Definition of the Temporal Ordering Specification Language LOTOS (1984)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Lachaume
    • 1
    • 2
  • Patrick Girard
    • 1
    Email author
  • Laurent Guittet
    • 1
    • 2
  • Allan Fousse
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.LIAS/ISAE-ENSMA/University of PoitiersChasseneuilFrance
  2. 2.FuturoscopeChasseneuil-du-PoitouFrance

Personalised recommendations