Data processing: database and file management or data structures – Database design – Data structure types
Reexamination Certificate
1998-01-07
2002-05-14
Feild, Joseph H. (Department: 2176)
Data processing: database and file management or data structures
Database design
Data structure types
C707S793000, C345S215000, C345S215000, C345S215000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06389437
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
Computer Program Listing Appendix
A computer program listing appendix on compact disk is included in this application. Appendix A and Appendix B are contained on a compact disk herewith as Appendix A.txt (space included), 51KB, loaded on the disk Nov. 21, 2001, and Appendix B.txt (no space included), 212KB, loaded on the disk Dec. 19, 2001, both of which are in ASCII format for an IBM PC/MS Windows compatible computer system, and both of which are incorporated herein by reference.
This invention relates generally to a display control system and, more particularly without limitation, to a system for controlling the display on the screen of a computer monitor for the purpose of reducing eye strain of, and increasing readability for, a user.
2. Description of the Related Art
Reading has never been a particularly natural task for the human eye, but scanning text on a computer screen appears to be especially more effortful than it is on a printed page. While the popular view of this phenomenon is that text on computers causes eye strain, it is more likely that text viewing generally increases the cognitive load on the user in a variety of ways. One of the main factors that may contribute to difficulty reading text on a computer screen has to do with document length. A common solution used to display long documents is to scroll the screen to bring more of the material into view. Prior art employs two scrolling strategies: screen-by-screen, line-by-line. The problem is that, however efficient these scrolling strategies are from an engineering standpoint, they may actually make the reading task more difficult for the user. The relevant issues encompass three key aspects of readability, namely reading speed, reading comprehension, and reading ease, each of which can be observed and measured as viewer performance variables. Content complexity can be considered a control variable, and should be used to distinguish effects among the three performance variables bearing on readability.
Users employ two strategies to move down through a long document, either to advance screen-by-screen or line-by-line, neither one of which is conducive to natural reading. Scrolling screen-by-screen is disruptive to the reading experience because it causes users to lose their place, forcing them to free cognitive resources away from text comprehension in order to reorient the eye in the proper location in the text. The other option is to scroll line-by-line, ensuring that only previously viewed material is removed from view, not new material. However, this imposes a control task on the reader that similarly drains cognitive resources away from the primary task of text comprehension.
Such strain is due in part to the sudden and repetitive vertical shifting of screen contents and the natural attempt by the human visual system to follow such apparent motions. It may also be due in part to a reduction of blinking, since the flicker caused by scrolling spoofs physical blinking. Continuous scrolling, by more or less constant vertical motion of screen contents, likewise subjects the viewer to strain due to finer, but more frequent, vertical steps and flicker. Furthermore, continuous scrolling rarely achieves real freedom from the distraction of display control; reading speed normally varies with content complexity, which may change substantially both within and between documents.
Thus, in choosing any of the commonly available scrolling strategies for consuming substantial reading material on-screen, the readability of the material is normally compromised. This happens either by disruptions in information flow, by distractions from the task of consuming and comprehending information, or by additional eye stress and fatigue. Fatigue may even foreshorten the consumption of significant amounts of readable material and affect comprehension.
Another problem with using a computer monitor for consuming readable material is that lines of text generally span from near one side of the monitor to the other. This may require substantial lateral eye movement for every line of text, which can cause user fatigue. Upon completion of reading one line of test, the human visual system generally retraces the line to find the beginning of the subsequent line of text. If the line of text is too long relative to its height, retrace errors can occur, disrupting the flow of information similarly to the incomplete scrolling problem previously described. Thus, readability is again compromised in reading ease and reading speed domains.
Prior art attempts to resolve this particular problem generally introduces either reduced-width columns or multiple columns of material on-screen. Reduced-width columns are certainly more readable, having shorter lines that are more easily retraced. However, reduced width columns also result in more scrolling, since the area required to present the material is more or less fixed, and reducing the width merely increases the depth needed to be reached by scrolling. Multiple columns of material may also result in reduced column width. However, the typical presentation layout principle is to form columns with a sufficient depth to reach the bottom of the printable page, and is primarily suited for off-screen consumption. Alternatively, a presentation layout principle for on-screen consumption is to more or less balance the depth of the columns. In this case, the scrolling task is even greater; the viewer must scroll to the bottom of a column and then scroll completely back to the top of the subsequent column. Thus, these prior art attempts to manage column widths may actually result in additional losses to readability.
Another common problem is the use of inappropriate type fonts in presenting material on-screen. The publisher may make use of rather small fonts, which can crowd more information onto the screen at once, thereby reducing the amount of scrolling required for complete consumption of the presented information. This strategy generally results in additional eye strain, due to squinting or straining to read uncomfortably small print, and due to increased retrace errors caused by long narrow lines of text. Again, readability is compromised. The significance of type fonts as bearing on readability is dependent on individual viewers (visual acuity) and on their environment (external lighting and monitor quality). Individual response to eye strain, as caused by small fonts or repetitive vertical scrolling, may invoke symptoms of optokinetic nystagmus, which is an involuntary eye reflex further enhanced by eye strain, which may also negatively affect reading performance. Nystagmus may arise regardless of font selection, however, due to eye strain induced by scrolling alone. The viewing environment issues (external lighting and monitor quality) may be considered noise factors in measuring readability, requiring controlled experimentation and statistical analysis. The intent of the publisher of the document is, presumably, to present information appropriately by predetermined font selections. Due to individual viewer preferences and environment factors, such intentions may well result in a higher rate of eye strain and reduced readability than normally considered or assumed.
Prior art often permits the viewer to adjust the size(s) of the type font used to render the document on-screen. The effort to discover and use methods to modify font size may discourage their use. More significantly, the presentation layout principles incorporated in the prior art are often inadequate to desirably fulfill viewer requirements to improve readability through font size modification. As an example, consider the implementation of multiple columns for a recent release of a web browser: the number of columns is prescribed by the web page author and cannot be modified by the viewer. As the viewer overrides the publisher's font selections in order to significantly enlarge font sizes for his own particular situation, the quality of the layout can be compromised. For instance, l
Feild Joseph H.
ION Systems, Inc.
Lathrop & Gage L.C.
Rossi Jeffrey Allen
LandOfFree
System for converting scrolling display to non-scrolling... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with System for converting scrolling display to non-scrolling..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and System for converting scrolling display to non-scrolling... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2844736