Cognitive load
Keith Martin
thatkeith at mac.com
Sun Apr 23 07:59:44 EDT 2017
On 23 Apr 2017, at 8:55, Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode wrote:
> I'm not sure why smaller should necessarily be better.
>
> Surely a better equation might be how much one gets out for what one
> puts in.
Well, that would be *another* measurement related but not the same.
Even harder to measure, I'm sure. The cognitive load of a menu-driven
scripting system such as early versions of Flash was very low indeed
(despite being rooted in an animation timeline concept) but it was
itself very limited. I think it's good that this Southern Cross U
comparison didn't go beyond a set of actual application development
tools.
I find the idea of cognitive load measurement extremely interesting. If
something's Just Damn Tough to learn it's simply less accessible. It's
the broad accessibility of xTalk that I have always found so exciting,
from my HyperCard 1.x and SuperCard 1.x days onwards... and it's the
relative Just Damn Tough-ness of Objective C that made me bail on my
attempts to learn it a few years back. The cognitive load was too much
for me. :-/
k
---
Keith Martin
Senior Lecturer, LCC (University of the Arts London)
President, http://IVRPA.org
http://PanoramaPhotographer.com
http://thatkeith.com
+44 (0)7909541365
---
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list