Definitions
icon
sign/symbol
metaphor
|
|
|
Definitions |
|
|
|
| ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' | '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' | |||||
 References |
Compounding
icon elements |
|||||
| J.
Morgan, P. Welton, 1986, See What I Mean,
Edward Arnold, p.9-10.
J. Ossner,
1990, Transnational Symbols: The Rule of Pictogram Models in the Learning
Process. In J. Nielson (ed), Designing User Interfaces
for International Use, Elsevier, Amsterdam, p.14. |
John
Morgan and Peter Welton summarised Wilbur Schramm's model of what two parties
need when communicating. Schramm's model implies that both sender and receiver
have to share the same set of skills: 'they have to use the same language
or code, and they have to use words or signs in the same way'. For this
to happen, they must have experience of the same social system and culture.
The Schramm model can be graphically expressed and applied to the example
opposite when using icon elements that have taken on meaning, and because
of other successful combinations that meaning is strengthened further. Circle
A represents familiar/unfamiliar elements. Circle B represents the combined
compound. Area AB represents what is familiar to both through systematic
application to other compound icons. In the computer
icon 'writing hand', many different elements from A can be joined with AB
to create new icons (figure 1). It is an application program but of what?
The Schramm model implies that familiar and frequently used elements might not be first in the viewing order, but are first in the reading order because they form part of a core lexicon. Also, Internet icon elements normally serve a 'doing' purpose, where many of the verb functions are described by similar elements such as hands, pens and so on (figure 2). Of this Jakob Ossner writes that 'by conventionality we mean that a community of senders uses one particular representamen'. This understanding of what the core lexicon elements represent, by predominantly being the same object that is represented, helps to inform the decoder what the other elements might possibly be.
|
|
||||
| Reading
order within the compound |
||||||
|
Figure 3. Conflict, contrast and harmony |
The reading
order of a compound icon can be dramatically altered through the use of
colour, without changing the size of the elements. This is an important
factor for computer icons, as size is at a premium. Therefore, the reading
order can be determined by adjusting the size of an element within the
compound, or by altering the saturation of hue and its lightness or darkness
against other elements. In the example to the |
|
||||
| Icon Elements |
+
|
Icon Colouration |
=
|
Icon state | ||
| Size and shape in relation to other elements | Saturation of hue and its lightness or brightness | Conflicting Harmonious Contrasting |
||||
  |
||||||
|
©
paul honeywill 2001 - a natural visual language research project |
left
the size of the elements which make-up the 'Assistant' icon are the same
(figures 3c, 3d and 3f). Their only difference is the colouration of the
elements which alter the relationship. Elements which work at one level
of saturation/lightness or brightness become overpowering or understated
when altered. Therefore, what influences the reading order within the
compound are:
