Chapter 9 and 10 of Hall’s The Hidden Dimension (1966) suggests a categorization scheme of physical proximity for humans with fixed features, semi-fixed features, and informal space. I agree with the categorizations to some extent and suggest further variables for consideration in these categories. I also speculate on their implications for a computational system.

The classification of fixed, semi-fixed, and informal space is a simplistic theory (and simple theories do bode well in the scientific community) and there are a lot of meaning to these notions of fixed and semi-fixed features that are not explored. For example, if a chair or desk is frequently moved about in one’s room, then this would be a semi-fixed feature. For someone else, that same chair may be placed always in the same location; the chair is now a fixed feature. What does it mean to each person? This may inform the design of a proximity-based system to also function as a statically placed object.

Whereas chapter 9 talks about a person’s proximity to inanimate objects, chapter 10 deals with an individual’s informal space with other people. Intimate, personal, social, and public distances are categorized with near and far subcategories. The descriptions of intimate and personal distances are very descriptive, except for the quantitative distances presented, but the descriptions for social and public distances are less clear. The minimum social distance is that one person cannot touch another, but the far distance is characterized by “Stand away so I can look at you” – what a vague notion this is. In my opinion, the distinction between social and public distance would be more descriptive as “I am occupying the same space (e.g., room, unit) as you and I might run into you” and “I am not occupying the same space as you”. This may inform the design of a proximity-based system to have a concept of “a user is within my space” and so on.

Although I have agreed with the descriptions of intimate and personal distances, Hall does not take into account the context of the situation. He has stated an example of the crowded subway station, but many more situations just like that change the meaning of the distance. Two people sitting beside each other can sit much closer than two people facing each other. For example, C-Trains in Calgary now have people sitting in rows facing one way to increase the personal/social distance rather than having people sit facing one way. Hall also has an example from the hospital ward where chairs were placed so that people would face each other at a right angle. For a computational system, these distances can be modelled as system modes, but not as the specific distance before interaction is enabled. An open question arises in inferring the user’s sense of distance when it is variable.