Navigation areas are extremely pervasive and popular UI structures today. They are usually presented in a major left-side area of a window, and as a pure hierarchy of selectable nodes. They typically have multiple roots as the highest-level folders, and branches for each root, down to “end leaves” or “end nodes”. Clicking an end node in a navigation tree typically navigates a user or launches for him a related panel or view.
Most administrative UIs today pair a left-side navigation or launch tree area with a larger area. However, more and more UIs are starting to introduce topology UIs in the content area (e.g., VMWare® and IBM® Systems Director 6.1) which can be useful to show non-hierarchical meshes, relationships, and flows.
A shortcoming of navigation trees today is that they don't handle non hierarchies at all or not very well. Yet, there is an ever-increasing and growing “meshing” and interconnections today between things. A pure hierarchal constraint places an unnatural and unnecessary limitation on navigation trees.
The problem is that most admin users prefer to stay in and use simpler tabular UIs if they do not need the added meshing available in a content-side topology view, and they often do not need the topology view. So, surfacing indicators and controls for the meshed information in the navigation frame could benefit users by preemptively giving them control at a higher level.
Another problem with today's hierarchical navigational areas is that they place the burden of displaying of non-hierarchical UIs within the content area, which leads to other issues. For one, non-hierarchical relationship UIs (“topology UIs”) are not very popular with users as a general purpose UI. One reason is because they are very difficult to scale to 100s or 1000s of items. And compared to tabular alternatives, they also can be more disorderly, take up a lot of screen space, and are harder to compare values among related items.
An embodiment of this invention provides indicators and quick access controls for the nodes in navigation tree that appear more than once in a hierarchy—where a pure hierarchical navigational tree falls short.
Some embodiments of invention are used below for demonstration. First example:
In an embodiment, (
Next, if the user clicks on the “Storage” text in
In one embodiment, if the user clicks on the mesh icon just to the left of the word “Storage” (or clicks “Storage” to toggle from hierarchy to mesh view, or some other similar highly surfaced way), he'd get a wider meshing of all the instances of storage within Blade2 as well as how the shared storage with Blade2 has relationships elsewhere. This is shown in
The second example illustrates another embodiment of the invention. Note all the repeating of node names (419 and 426), which makes the navigation tree long and unwieldy (
Therefore, in one embodiment, contextually and inline with the navigation tree, the user could quickly re-orient the tree to group all the repeating nodes together. One way to do this would be to re-root the tree based on the selection. So, if the user chooses the mesh button next to a “Monitoring” node in
An embodiment of the invention is a method of using navigation area controls and indicators for non-hierarchies for a user-interface structure, the method comprising:
A system, apparatus, or device comprising one of the following items is an example of the invention: navigation area controls and indicators, user-interface structure, navigation area, content area, mesh structure, information about files or objects, topology, non-hierarchical mesh structure, node, leaf node, container node, collapsible node, mesh column, redundant nodes, navigation tree, expanded view, compressed view, display device, or any software, applying the method mentioned above, for purpose of invitation or using navigation area controls and indicators for non-hierarchies for a user-interface structure.
Any variations of the above teaching are also intended to be covered by this patent application.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4864497 | Lowry et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
5715444 | Danish et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
6055515 | Consentino et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6636250 | Gasser | Oct 2003 | B1 |
7290222 | Guido et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7313761 | Mcclellan | Dec 2007 | B1 |
20020052692 | Fahy | May 2002 | A1 |
20040003013 | Coulthard et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20050132304 | Guido et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20060101424 | Griffith et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20070266321 | Bicker et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080016474 | Guido et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |