Chapter 11 – Command Names

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses command names. The designer's goal is to create a set of names that users would easily learn to recreate efficiently or interpret correctly at the appropriate moment. The naming practices of users could be influenced by the provision of name sets and other system support that lead naturally to effective and efficient interaction. When users name files, create macro commands, or create aliases for system terminology, they, too, are designing or extending name sets. A number of factors would vary from one name-set design to the next. Designers are expected to consider these factors more or less automatically. They are also expected to consider whether a command language is an appropriate design solution or to otherwise consider how names relate to the particular style of dialogue adopted. There are, nevertheless, many potential pitfalls. Designers might have intuitions about user psychology that are incomplete or just plain inaccurate. Existing command name sets within commercial products provide evidence of what designers do in arriving at name sets. However, for a given name-set design, it is difficult to determine how it was arrived at and how many people were involved in the design process.

[1]  Gerald M. Weinberg,et al.  Goals and Performance in Computer Programming , 1974 .

[2]  Phyllis Reisner,et al.  Use of Psychological Experimentation as an Aid to Development of a Query Language , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[3]  Jean E. Sammet,et al.  An overview of nonprocedural languages , 1974 .

[4]  Thomas P. Moran,et al.  The Command Language Grammar: A Representation for the User Interface of Interactive Computer Systems , 1981, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[5]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  A framework for choosing a database query language , 1985, CSUR.

[6]  Donald E. Broadbent,et al.  The Allocation of Descriptor Terms by Individuals in a Simulated Retrieval System , 1978 .

[7]  Donald D. Chamberlin,et al.  Relational Data-Base Management Systems , 1976, CSUR.

[8]  Won Kim,et al.  Relational Database Systemsr , 1979, CSUR.

[9]  Howard N. Ray,et al.  A Study of the Effect of Different Data Models on Casual Users Performance in Writing Database Queries , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[10]  Matthias Jarke,et al.  A Field Evaluation of Natural Language for Data Retrieval , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[11]  Robert L. Leitheiser,et al.  Computer support for knowledge workers: A review of laboratory experiments , 1986, DATB.

[12]  Toby J. Teorey,et al.  Metaform: updatable form screens and their application to the use of office metaphors in query language instruction , 1987 .

[13]  Allen Newell,et al.  The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems , 1980, CACM.

[14]  Charles Welty,et al.  Correcting User Errors in SQL , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[15]  Michael Hammer,et al.  Specifying queries as relational expressions: the SQUARE data sublanguage , 1975, CACM.

[16]  Rodney N. Cuff On casual users , 1980 .

[17]  Cecilia Katzeff Dealing with a Database Query Language in a New Situation , 1986, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[18]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  A psychology of learning BASIC , 1979, CACM.

[19]  Yvonne Wærn,et al.  On Search in an Incomplete Database , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[20]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Two experimental comparisons of relational and hierarchical database models , 1978 .

[21]  Thomas P. Moran,et al.  Guest Editor's Introduction: An Applied Psychology of the User , 1981, CSUR.

[22]  Donald D. Chamberlin,et al.  SEQUEL 2: A Unified Approach to Data Definition, Manipulation, and Control , 1976, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[23]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  The Psychology of How Novices Learn Computer Programming , 1981, CSUR.

[24]  David W. Stemple,et al.  Human factors comparison of a procedural and a nonprocedural query language , 1981, TODS.

[25]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Improving the human factors aspect of database interactions , 1978, TODS.