Talk:Pie menu

message: This article seems like it's about 10% information and 90% mindless cheerleading for pie menus. Most of this should probably be cut out.
Knight508 (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objectivity? 

message: I guess pie menu can also mean the menu at a restaurant that lists the pies available. lol
FLaRN2005 02:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how serious you are, but... a quick Google for "pie menu" (with the quotes) seems to only give information about what the article is about, so I don't think your meaning is used very often, and there doesn't need to be a disambiguation link on top or anything like that. Retodon8 23:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not sure how serious you are, but... this is why people make fun of Wikipedia contributors ...   --69.139.198.89 05:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another meaning 

message: :Image:Piemenu2.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Piemenu2.png

message: There needs to be a citation to prove that Don Hopkins invented pie menus because reading the literature this statement appears false. See this academic paper on the history of pie menus written by Dr. Gordon Kurtenbach at Alias: . Note especially that the above referenced paper mentions that the first implementation of pie menus is attributed to a system called PIXIE in 1969. If this true it then follows that Don Hopkins is not the inventor of pie menus. --Kristensson 02:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Don Hopkins the inventor of pie menus? 

message: I disagree with this unsourced statement:
"Pie menus come with a higher cognitive load, because of the use of higher order cognitive processes associated with memory recall than with visual navigation."
Is there any published research to back the claim up? If not, then remove it. Muscle memory doesn't require a high cognitive load, but visual navigation does. 
Remembering a direction and mousing ahead into a pie menu without looking at the screen requires a much lower cognitive load than engaging in a hand/eye feedback loop to hit a small rectangular target, which requires your entire visual attention. 
Muscle memory enables users to select pie menu items whose direction they can remember, without looking at the screen. Visual navigation of linear menus requires the user to focus their attention on the screen in a hand/eye feedback loop, looking at the cursor and moving the mouse until they see the cursor has entered the desired rectangular target. 
Linear menu targets are typically too small to hit without looking at the screen, because it's easy to move too far past the item without knowing it. Pie menu targets are wedge shaped and extend out to the edge of the screen, and selected purely by direction, not distance, so you can increase your selection accuracy by moving further out to the wider part of the slice, instead of missing the target by not moving far enough or moving too far. 
This has been discussed in the various papers and articles linked on the web page, so it's not original research. 
Don Hopkins  —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was not referring to the use of muscle memory when I wrote that the cognitive load on recollection is higher than that of visual navigation. This has more to do with the recollection of what the menu holds rather than the direction used utilized to acces menu item X. But perhaps that should be moved to the context menus article because it is relevant to all types of menus that have its alternatives hidden? What do you think? First you have to remember that menu item X actually is there. One link to a relatively recent research paper on the phenomenon have been added. Please tell me if you want additional more recent or earlier resources. NiklasBr (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 11:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, it should be moved to context menus, as pie menus can actually address the problem by using meaningful associations between the menu items and their radial placement (i.e., left = back, right = forward).  I removed the statements for now, but you can get the text from the history page. --Quetzilla (talk) 02:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's unclear the meaning of the phrase "Pie menus come with a higher cognitive load", since there are several referents in the previous paragraph. Compared to what?  linear context menus? nested pie menus? toolbars and menu bars? If it's the latter, then yes, this should be moved to the context menus article. Diego (talk) 13:11, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cognitive Load 

message: The introduction of the article is misleading. Marking menus are an extension of the original pie menus, they're not the same technique. Dragice (talk) 08:40, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the remark, I'll try to reword it. Can you provide more details to give context to the technique? I have no knowledge of marking menus beyond the linked article. Any source you could refer to would be valuable. Diego Moya (talk) 11:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

text: --User:Diego Moya bows to the Master. 18:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marking menus vs. Pie menus 

message: The following text is incorrect: "A marking menu is a variant of the technique where the menu is not shown when the interaction is short, allowing for faster operation times when several gestures are chained to make a selection through the first and subsequent menus." That is probably based on a misconception or mistaken assumption in some papers published by Buxton and Kurtenbach.
It's a misconception that the idea of "marking ahead" was original to
marking menus. The earlier papers on marking menus may have mistakenly
implied that, because the authors were not familiar with my
implementation of pie menus first hand, and didn't discuss it with me,
but pie menus have always supported "mouse ahead display pre-emption".
That property is described in an article I wrote on March 10 1988,
"How to Choose with Pie Menus":
http://www.donhopkins.com/drupal/node/95
Also the article I wrote in Dec 1991 Dr. Dobb's Journal in the section
"Pie Menu Advantages" describes "mark ahead":
http://www.donhopkins.com/drupal/node/98
Also "A Pie Menu Cookbook" that I wrote in October 1987 describes mouse ahead:
http://www.donhopkins.com/drupal/taxonomy_menu/4/49/14/19
"Experienced users can select from familiar pie menus without looking
at the menu, and can even mouse ahead into menus faster than the
computer can update the screen. When the user selects by mousing ahead
into a menu, suppressing the menu display can speed up interaction
considerably."
Pie menus also support "reselection", which is the ability to correct
your selection in-flight. That is something that gesture based
hierarchal marking menus can't support, because they base the
selection on analyzing the actual shape of the path instead of just
the angle between the endpoints.
The idea is that every possible pie menu gesture (sequence of one
down, multiple moves, then one up event) is a valid (and easily
understood) selection, because pie menus ignore the position of the
move events between down and up events, and are purely based on the
direction between endpoints (which enables reselection).
Gesture recognition systems do not fully cover all possible gestures
-- in fact most possible gestures are unrecognized syntax errors. But
all pie menu gestures are valid selections, and it's very easy for the
user to understand and control how a complex gesture will be
interpreted (since it's simply based on direction between endpoints,
as opposed to a complex gesture recognition system that interprets the
path).
So pie menus are forgiving of mistakes and allowing of correction, in
a way that gesture recognition systems are not. In fact, most possible
gestures are syntax errors (while the boundaries between valid
gestures are not necessarily comprehensible by the user), while all
possible pie menu gestures are meaningful and comprehensible.
Reselection and menu display pre-emption is even nicer when the
application can give immediate feedback in the form of a preview of
the command that will happen when you release the button. The
immediate in-app feedback mitigates the need to pop up a pie menu
window immediately. Plus you can also use the distance between the
cursor and menu center as a parameter, such as a font style/size
selection menu that gives immediate feedback in the text it's
changing. So you can just roll around the menu until the text looks
the way you want, then release the button, without popping up the menu
window.
Here's an example of pie menus with reselection and immediate feedback:
http://www.donhopkins.com/home/movies/JavaScriptPieMenus.mov
And here is a video from around 1991 that demonstrates display
pre-emption and light-weight immediate feedback:
http://www.donhopkins.com/home/movies/TabWindowDemo.mov
-Don Hopkins Xardox (talk) 14:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: --User:Diego Moya bows to the Master. 18:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correcting a common misconception about Marking Menus 

message: The article largely reads like someone real excited about pie menus wrote it. If pie menus are so great, why don't we see them more? Obviously, pie menus are not able to show things lined up in columns. Pie menus seem OK in some cases, but hardly anything to be excited about. 71.212.54.210 (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything in the article is true and referenced. They have mayor drawbacks that impede their - mainly that they are only useful for a small number of items, that they are difficult to read, and that they're not integrated in common widget toolkits. These drawbacks should be detailed in the article. Diego (talk) 09:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does not seem objective 

message: I made some edits to the Usage section to make it more descriptive, I think it is better than before, but I haven't found any extra references for it. It might need more attention later.
--Zhaoyebai (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Usage section 

message: Hello everyone!
The usage section has been flagged as being written like an essay, and while the content within it is solid, I think it could do with some rewording to keep it away from the essay style. I also think that the notable implementations section could also be reworded. I intend to carry out these edits in the next few weeks, and will workshop them on my own end so things shouldn’t be too incremental in the meantime. Just wanted to say hi and inform of my intentions, please feel free if you have any recommendations or if you object to these proposed edits. Thanks! GooglyEyedRock (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planned Revision of the Usage Section