From: dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu (David Mark) Subject: Re: comp.hci.* (was Re: Proposal to create sci.virtual-worlds. Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1991 14:59:48 GMT Organization: SUNY Buffalo In article <1991Oct18.194534.23213@milton.u.washington.edu> cyberoid@milton. u.washington.edu (Bob Jacobson) writes: >In article <1991Oct18.001420.19115@milton.u.washington.edu> Craig Hubley > writes: > >[Regarding the creation of a new newgroup...] > >>If you are going to go off in this direction, I suggest that we go back >>into the comp.* hierarchy. ... [some lines deleted] >>Then we would have something like this: >> comp.hci general human-computer interaction issues >> (replacing comp.human-factors and comp.cog-eng) >> comp.hci.groupware (comp.groupware renamed) >> comp.hci.hypermedia (alt.hypertext renamed) >> comp.hci.virtual-worlds (sci.virtual-worlds renamed) >> comp.hci.virtual-worlds.homebrew (the mailing list renamed) Bob Jacobson wrote: >Let me beg to differ. From the process of watching this field evolve over >the last 24 months, for me virtuality is a phenomenon to which human >experience, not computer technology and techniques, is central. ... If "virtual-worlds" stays in the sci hierarchy, then shouldn't it be something like: sci.spatial-perception-and-cognition.virtual-worlds (I know that's too long) But the point is that if the virtual experience is not primarily computational/technological, then it is predominently psychological, and should discuss how people deal with real-reality. Personally, I think that VR best belongs under a comp.hci topic, as proposed by Craig Hubley. All of hci, user interface design, 'cognitive engineering', etc., needs to have a strong current of behavioral science. We need to know how people deal with the real world if we are to develop 'natural' ways for them to interact with computers to solve real-world problems. David Mark dmark@sun.acsu.buffalo.edu (Sorry to post 2-weeks late-- I got bogged down with other things and behind with my news reading)