GINO-F(ID:5658/gin004)extension of GINO Related languages
References: INTRODUCTION During the early phases of computer aided design research, problems of spatial arrangement enjoyed a somewhat misleading popularity. This popularity was founded on the acceptance of single, easily quantified parameters as adequate representations of the problem; numerous programs were developed to give "optimal" arrangements of blocks on the simple basis of weighted adjacencies or similar distance functions. More complex spatial relationships, such as circulation and visual access, had to be modeled indirectly by the distance parameter. And form criteria, such as size and shape, could not be addressed as variables at all. These programs were an important initial step, but because of their reliance on simple parameters they failed to adequately address the process they were created to assist. IMAGE, the computer design aid system described in this paper, has been developed to go beyond the single parameter approach, to operate on a more flexible set of form explicit criteria and to facilitate its interaction with the designer's own process. Extract: THE CONTEXT FOR A DESIGN AID THE CONTEXT FOR A DESIGN AID The primary factor of the designer's search for a satisfactory form is his image, or perception, of a problem. It is this image which motivates the generation, transformation, selection, or rejection of various form alternatives. A designer's image of his problem derives from diverse sources which go well beyond the objectives stated by and inferred from his client. This image is affected by his commitments to a larger audience than his immediate client, is impacted by his experience as a designer, and is based in the culture and political system of which he is a product. Though only a few of the factors which affect the designer can actually be traced to their sources, and though their effect on his search for form is often immeasurable, they do combine to form a very rich and diverse problem image. The designer's problem image is also dynamic. It changes as his client's objectives become more specific. It is altered by his search for solutions and changes at the pace of an advancing culture and technology, as well as at the pace of the problem's development. The interface between the designer's perception of his problem and its ultimate solution can be characterized by the translation of the problem's various objectives into explicit form requirements. For example, the need for acoustic privacy between two spaces can be translated into several different form criteria. The two rooms might be separated by dense walls, by large distances or even by other spaces. Each of these interpretations will have different form consequences. The selection of any particular form specification is a significant commitment towards a final form. In the process of seeking a form solution, the designer may explore the consequences of several different interpretations for a single objective. In such a case, he seeks not only the solution to his problem but a satisfactory description of that problem as well. Of course, not all of the designer's perceptions need to be translated into specific form criteria. It is probably impossible for the designer to account for his total wealth of problem information; and many of his objectives will not even relate directly to form. Moreover, each particular form directive will probably be influenced by several interdependent factors of the designer's problem image. It is the designer's particular strategy, then, to employ as much or as little of his perception as he feels necessary to initiate his search for a form -- to operate heuristically, exploring different formulations of his goals and to hypothesize a large variety of form solutions. The major objective of the IMAGE system is to assist the designer in his search for an appropriate description of his problem, and to aid in the creation of spatial arrangements which satisfy that description. To do this, IMAGE provides the designer with a language of form-explicit relationships. These relationships are used to translate the designer's objectives into a form directive model from which alternate spatial arrangements can be generated. In turn, the spatial arrangements generated to satisfy this model enable the designer to see the consequences of a particular form interpretation and to explore the effects of different problem formulations. In this way, IMAGE aids the designer in his search for both the problem statement and the problem solution. Extract: THE IMAGE SYSTEM THE IMAGE SYSTEM PROBLEM SPECIFICATION The designer initiates his use of IMAGE by constructing a model or form specific description of his problem. This problem description consists of both the spaces to be arranged and of the form relationships which should be satisfied between those spaces. With such a problem description, IMAGE can generate alternative spatial arrangements. SPACES Each space which the designer specifies in IMAGE is a rectangular volume defined by nine variable descriptors. These nine descriptors contain the data necessary to describe the position, size, and orientation of the rectangular volume in Euclidean space. Three of the nine variables contain the x, y, and z coordinates at the centroid of the space. Three others contain the dimensions of the space, measured from its centroid to its outer faces. The final three variables are used to record the space's orientation. With these descriptors, any plane, corner, or edge of a volume can be located in three dimensions by simple calculations. Changes in any of its descriptors represent physical change to the space, and it is by manipulating the values of these spatial descriptors that IMAGE generates new configurations. Rectangular volumes were chosen to minimize computation complexity yet provide the ability to study problems in three dimensions. The choice of non-rectangular spaces would have greatly complicated the generating routines, extended computer usage time, and enlarged the data storage requirements. NON-RECTANGULAR SPACES Of course, not all architectural spaces are rectangular. Many functions require more complex forms. For example, auditoriums, operating theatres, and sports arenas require angular or curved surfaces. Despite its limitation to rectangular volumes, however, IMAGE does allow a designer to deal with more complex forms by aggregating several volumes into one. Two or more rectangular spaces may be combined to form a composite volume whose outer surface forms the required shape and whose constituent volumes act as a single unit. The composite volume gives the designer an opportunity to develop a more elaborate and explicit specification of his problem. For example, a designer may have a specially shaped:space in mind for the performance area of a theatre. He can create the form of that space using several rectangular volumes fixed relative to one another in a desired configuration (See Fig. l ) . He then has the opportunity to specify special relationships between individual components of the space and other parts of the building. in [ACM/IEEE] Annual ACM IEEE Design Automation Conference Proceedings of the June 1971 design automation workshop on Design automation, Atlantic City, New Jersey, United States view details in [ACM/IEEE] Annual ACM IEEE Design Automation Conference Proceedings of the June 1971 design automation workshop on Design automation, Atlantic City, New Jersey, United States view details Historically SKETCHPAD (Sutherland) was the first widely recognized general purpose graphics system. The SKETCHPAD system consists of a collection of subroutines called interactively through a menu selection process. The system allows pictures to be constructed hierarchically from other pictures and is noted for its use of a ring data structure to store picture descriptions. Kulsrud, Williams, and Giloi presented models for the definition of a general purpose graphics language, Kulsrud suggested that the first version of the proposed language have written commands and that it later be adjusted to accept input from graphics devices such as light pens and trackballs. The language she described was capable of picture description, manipulation, and analysis. Although it could be used with interactive applications programs, it was not an interactive language. Williams described a language that provided (i) data types with related operations particularly suited to graphical applications, and (2) the ability to add new data types and operations. For example, a "point,' could be a data type, and a specially defined addition operator would operate on that data type. The language was thus highly extensible, but it was not interactive. Giloi proposed a model to be used in constructing either subroutine packages for graphic display applications or graphical extensions to existing languages. In this model, pictures were described as a hierarchy of subpictures and picture primitives. Primitives were defined as anything for which there was a hardware generator in the display processor, placing limits on the device independence of a language developed from his model. An interactive version of the model was developed by extending APL to include graphics capabilities, and a non-interactive version was developed as a FORTRAN subroutine package. The general purpose graphics systems presented in recent years can be classified as (i) subroutine packages for graphics applications, (2) graphics extensions to existing languages, and (3) new languages possessing graphics capabilities. Graphics subroutine packages are most widely distributed particularly by manufacturers of graphics display hardware. Some example packages are GINO-F, GPGS, GRAF, DISSPLA, and EXPLOR. Most packages are limited to the manipulation of picture displays with few programming control or storage capabilities. Where such abilities are available they often serve specialized purposes as in WAVE, a package for waveform analysis. One exception is the VIP system where the user is able to combine the available system function subroutines into special purpose functions which can then be used in the same way that the original system functions were used. Extensions of an existing language such as Euler-G, IMAGE, APLBAGS, APLG, and PENCIL, provide a programmer with graphics capabilities as well as general programming features. Euler-G has excellent data structure definition facilities. IMAGE, an extension of FORTRAN, cannot provide the data structure description capabilities that are available in Euler-G, but it has the advantage of being based on the most widely distributed host language available. APLBAGS, APLG, and PENCIL, an extension of the MULTILANG on-line programming system, are truly conversational languages. GRASP, a PL/I extension, is a compiled language but it allows dynamic interaction. GRASP also allows the definition of models from which complex pictures can be created hierarchically. ESP3, an extension of SNOBOL4, is a non-interactive language from which many of the high-level concepts found in PIGLI are drawn. Language extensions are found mainly in experimental installations. Two complete graphics languages are METAVISU and GLIDE. Both take characteristics from a base language (PL/I and ALGOL, respectively) and add capabilities for defining, displaying, and manipulating pictures. Full languages are less widely distributed than subroutine packages or language extensions. in Proceedings of the 1978 annual conference 1978, Washington, D.C., United States view details |