Computer graphics processing and selective visual display system – Display peripheral interface input device – Cursor mark position control device
Reexamination Certificate
2000-01-20
2003-06-24
Saras, Steven (Department: 2675)
Computer graphics processing and selective visual display system
Display peripheral interface input device
Cursor mark position control device
C345S159000, C345S215000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06583782
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to feedback affecting a computer display device with regards to motion of a pointing device interfaces to that computer.
The prior art teaches for methodologies interactions between a display device
10
and a pointing device
12
(see FIG.
1
). There has been a continual evolution of content and interface regarding these two components resulting in mechanisms including windowing systems. Such windowing systems are often composed of a region (window) of the display device, further composed of sub-regions. These sub-regions include, by way of illustration, buttons, pull-down menus and icons activating specific window functions. These window functions often include but are not limited to opening and saving files, numeric and operator buttons on calculator and spreadsheet applications, copying, cutting and pasting highlighted material within the window to a clipboard.
Human physiology is inherently imprecise, as evidenced by an examination of raw sensor data from a mouse. This data is usually very “ragged”. Operating systems and in particular, pointing device drivers, including mouse drivers, often possess built-in acceleration curves to smooth out these discontinuities on a global scale.
There are a number of situations regarding windowing systems in general when there is a need to reduce background mechanical noise with regards to pointing device movement. Illustrative examples include users with limited coordination, such as the very young as well as people possessing limited mechanical control of the pointing device. Such limited mechanical control can be additionally caused by background noise, such as using a notebook computer on a bumpy airplane or transit ride. Existing interfaces lack sufficient noise reduction support, causing users to lose productivity in such circumstances.
A further limitation to existing interfaces is a lack of readily accessible control of pointers as they approach the boundary of a display region such as a window. In a number of applications including multimedia players, as the user moves the pointing device further and further in a given direction, the action should continue, even if it is at the boundary of the display region. The application developer should have control of what happens in such situations, rather than be governed by decisions made by the operating system designers. Form should best follow function, allowing the application developer the freedom to express the response of the pointer with regards to the display system in a manner consistent with the interaction with the user's activity with the pointing device.
Other evolutionary results include display mechanisms for 2-D, 3-D and 4-D systems utilizing one or more specific perspectives, views or projections onto specific planes. Such multidimensional displays often map from a virtual region containing sub-regions and representing the pointing device as having an associated virtual pointer location relative to the virtual region. Such pointers may or may not be visible on the display device. When visible, they often appear as a cursor. There is a need in many of these systems to alter the overall motion of the pointer based upon some or all of the sub-regions the pointer is traversing. Such alterations include but are not limited to the portrayal of friction, currents, attraction and repulsion, impulsive and inertial motion effects induced on the pointer by proximity to one or more traversed sub-regions, and thus affecting the display.
In 2-D and 3-D system display mechanisms, there is an option of using direct force feedback pointing devices, which has prior art, particularly in the 2-D situation.
Such pointing devices tend to cost more than standard pointing devices and also to be subject to the same problems of background mechanical noise as discussed above.
The mechanical complexity, and consequently, the cost for 3-D implementations is significantly greater than for 2-D implementations. There are no known direct feedback mechanisms for higher than 3-D system interfaces.
Prior art system interfaces incorporating a pointing device and display often further incorporate a user interface to calibrate the pointing device. On a number of systems including Windows systems, such user calibration tends to be known as control panels. A correlation factor between displaced movement of the pointing device and resulting movement of a displayed cursor is a common calibration control in such interfaces. This is a worthwhile basic user interface control, but it does not permit for the calibration of friction or traction based upon traversing various sub-regions, nor any form of attraction nor inertia.
Further, some prior art interfaces have shown a slowing effect when traversing a specific sub-region. This has most notably been seen in a slowing when crossing the “OK” button and “Cancel” button on certain prompt windows in the Microsoft Windows operating systems. While this is an improvement, it does not tend to filter out background mechanical noise as discussed above. It is further not available to developers to control for other graphical interface elements, such as other kinds of controls, pull down menus, etc.
Adobe Illustrator provides a limited snap to handle capability when moving one object with handles near a second object with handles. If the handles come within a small number of pixels of each other, say four pixels, the neighboring handles of these objects snap to each other, with the one in motion moving toward the other object. To separate them requires moving the cursor greater than four pixels to again separate them. While there are objects with can attract cursor driven objects, it is strictly a snap operation. There are no control panels or other mechanisms by which this can be extended or modified. There is a fixed distance at which it occurs. While useful, it is not very flexible and possesses no obvious way to extend such a mechanism to induce motion in any other form.
FIG. 2
portrays a system block diagram of prior related art showing the interface of a microprocessor
20
, display
10
, a pointing device
12
and other circuitry including but not limited to mass storage device(s)
14
and network interface
16
. In such typical prior art systems an IO bus
18
often provides the communication for such devices. Communication
18
includes but is not limited to treating such circuitry as addressable devices on an ISA bus or Universal Serial Bus (USB). In certain examples implementation of communication
18
employs more than one such bus mechanism.
Display devices
10
and pointing devices
12
are not the subject of the invention. Prior art pointing devices
12
for desktop systems with electrically interfaces include but are not limited to mouse pointing devices, pen tablets, touch pads and joy sticks. Smaller computers such as notebook computers and Personal Digital Assistants often incorporate touch pads, pointing buttons, and pen tablet pointing devices. Other prior art pointing devices
12
incorporating a wireless interface include but are not limited to 3-D mice and selector controls for various television, television-like and entertainment systems. The most frequent display devices are CRT displays and flat panel displays, some of which are in color and some of which are in black and white, sometimes further capable of shades of gray and one or more speakers. Personal Digital Assistants often integrate the display and a pen tablet into a veiwable writing surface.
Optionally, mass storage devices
14
commonly include but are not limited to removable and non-removable media devices. Non-removable media include but are not limited to hard disk drives and non-volatile solid state disks. Removable media include but are not limited to floppy disk drives, CD ROM players, PCMCIA flash disk drives and Compact Flash drives.
Optional network interfaces
16
available in typical prior art systems include but are not limited to wireless and wireline communication schemes. Wireless schemes include but are not limite
Gould Eric Justin
Ho Tina Chia
Risnadi Paulus W.
Wilkins S. Todd
Awad Amr
Kotab Dominic M.
MONKEYmedia, Inc.
Saras Steven
Silicon Valley IP Group
LandOfFree
Virtual force feedback interface does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Virtual force feedback interface, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Virtual force feedback interface will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3109682