Range and Proximity

First off, I agree with most of what has been written in this paper. The way of dividing up user actions and system responses along two axes is understandable. After reading so many papers on the user of Hall's 4 distances for proxemic interaction, I wonder if their implementation should be written into the Vicon Toolkit. Even more so, if you start dealing with more entities and want to understand what sort of interaction is taking place, having a system that can easily detect groupings in a space could be beneficial.

Also, in Richard's response to the reading he wrote:

"I do not agree with some statements made by the authors in lessons learned. They state, “Implicit interactions often rely on the counterintuitive strategy of calling attention to observed or inferred perceptions”. This statement could mean that there is a mismatch between the user’s mental model and the system’s state."..."What the real issue is the lack of understanding of the system’s input."

I think the point that is being made in this paper is that implicit interactions are suppose to be done without needing to know the system model. The whole idea behind implicit interaction is to build the system to adapt to the natural actions of the user. If the user is having to understand how this works and adapt to the implicit sensing in the system, it become explicit.