the art of beautiful writing

Description

• expression écrite - matière potentielle : general purpose
• expression écrite - matière potentielle : styles
• expression écrite

the art of beautiful writing Calligraphy Calligraphy collection

• dip pen
• pen ink
• starter pack
• storage tin
• nib
• description nib style
• washable mc4401 mc4300 mc4400 mc4401 mc4404 mc4405 mc4406 mc4407 mc4408 mc0201rd mc0201cb mc0201sp mc0201be mc0401as mc0461as
• classic
• calligraphy
• code

Sujets

• Style
• Collection
• Calligraphy
• Description
• Classic

Informations

• Publié par: irma
• Nombre de lectures: 35
• Langue: English

Extrait

SI 622: Evaluation of Systems & Services
Winter 2008
Comparative Evaluation
Project Client:
Syntax2D
Taubman College of Architecture
& Urban Planning
University of Michigan
Tao Dong
Maureen Hanratty
Adam Torres
Lingyun Xu | Table of contents Syn Tax 2.0: Compara Tive evalua Tion | I
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview of Syntax2D . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Competing Software Products . . . . . . . . . . 4
Functionality Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Detailed Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Integration with other software tools . . . . . . . 5
Visibility analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Axial line analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Software interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Ease of use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Open Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix
Grid isovist measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Axial line measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Task fow chart: Syntax2D . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Task fow chart: Depthmap . . . . . . . . . . 201 |
Comparative Evaluation of
Syntax2D
research. Measures such as connectivity, inte-Introduction
gration and mean depth can be visualized on a
This report document is a comparative evalu- grid and also exported to an Excel spreadsheet
ation of Syntax2D, an open source software as quantitative data. Source fles for Syntax2D
suite for urban and architectural spatial are computer-aided design (CAD) drawings in
analysis developed at the Taubman College of the 2000 .DXF format.
Architecture & Urban Planning (TCAUP) at the
Syntax2D is an attempt by University of Michi-
University of Michigan.
gan researchers to integrate a suite of spatial
The analysis starts with an overview of Syntax analysis tools that takes advantage of current
2D. Next, a literature survey on spatial analysis systems. Unlike the current selection of space
is presented to give an idea about the state of syntax analysis tools, which were too special-
the art in this area. An overview of the method- ized or written for now-obsolete operating
ologies and criteria used are given in the third systems and CAD software, Syntax2D is devel-
section of the report. The particular systems oped as a common platform for spatial analysis
used for comparison are Depthmap, Omini- research compatible with GIS. It is capable of
Vista, Confeego, and Spatialist. A functionality performing most of the existing spatial analysis
matrix is provided to visualize the difference measures found in current software plus sev-
between the systems. Detailed fndings fesh eral unique features and forms of analysis that
out the data documented in the functionality are not elsewhere.
matrix.
Syntax2D is used by faculty and students at
the University of Michigan to conduct visibility
Overview of Syntax2D analysis for both interior buildings and urban
spaces. However, as a newly introduced spatial Syntax2D is an open source spatial analysis
analysis software, Syntax2D has not exerted its software program developed by the Taubman
full potential among the University of Michigan College of Architecture and Urban Planning at
community. According to our user interviews, the University of Michigan. It is a suite of tools
most interviewees use only small part of the for researchers and practitioners to analyze
methods that Syntax2D provides. Path analysis spatial confguration of buildings and urban
and point count are the only frequently used spaces. Syntax2D features isovist, grid, and
functionalities. For other analysis (spatial con-axial analysis as well as path analysis and
fguration and axial analysis), the interviewees counting features intended to assist with feld
usually turn to Depthmap with which they have 2 | Syn Tax 2.0: Compara Tive evalua Tion
been acquainted for a long time. polygon, or isovist, representing a person’s
feld of vision at eye height. The formal defni -
Syntax2D distinguishes itself in the way that it
tion of an isovist is “the set of all points visible
is an open source platform for spatial analysis.
from a given vantage point in space.” Isovist
It is free to download from the University of
measures include the area and perimeter of
Michigan so long as users agree to the terms
the visibility polygon. In space syntax software
of the open source license. This allows the
programs a mouse click on a point in the layout
user to install and run the program for aca-
generates the visibility polygon of an individual
demic research as well as to view and modify
vantage point. This is referred to as a point
the source code. Open source methodologies
isovist.
have been proved to be able to correct pro-
gram errors, speed development, improve the Space syntax can be used to describe the
quality of tools, and enhance collaboration and visibility for an entire spatial confguration, in
research transparency. With the software and a process called visibility graph analysis. It is
source code freely available, Syntax2D is an used to determine how visible any point in the
opportunity for the space syntax community to spatial confguration is from any other point
share and build upon their work across a com- (Turner, 2003). Measures generated from vis-
mon framework (Wineman et al, 2008) ibility graph analysis include connectivity, the
“measure of how many other viewpoints are
visible from a viewpoint,” and mean depth, “the Literature Review average depth from one element to all others,”
(Dalton & Dalton, 2001; Turner, 2003). Visibility Space syntax is a set of theories and tech-
measures from visibility graph analysis have niques for analyzing spatial layouts in build-
been shown to correlate highly with observed ings and urban spaces. A layout is broken
pedestrian movement in an urban context (De-down into spatial elements, or nodes, and a
syllas & Duxbury, 2001).graph is used to analyze relationships among
the spatial elements (Major, Hillier & Hanson, Visibility analysis can also be performed on a
1998). Quantitative measures produced by path (path isovist) and points (point count). Re-
these techniques describe how well integrated searchers usually create drawings of paths and
and connected, and thus human navigable, the points from direct observational studies of in-
spaces are within a system. The theories and dividuals in a building or urban context. A path
techniques of space syntax combine the work represents an individual’s movement through
of many scholars and were frst presented as a space. A point may represent a spot where
a whole in The Social Logic of Space (Hillier & an individual stopped. By applying visibility
Hanson, 1984). analysis to these paths and points, researchers
seek to understand whether the spatial layout A core theory of space syntax is the importance
of the space effects an individual’s movement of visibility to an individual’s understanding of
through it.and movement through space. Gibson (1979)
theorized that optic fow guides a person Axial line analysis is another space syntax
through an environment. Inspired by Gibson’s method. Axial lines are the fewest and longest
theories Benedikt (1979) proposed a visibility lines of site in a spatial confguration. Strate -3 | Syn Tax 2.0: Compara Tive evalua Tion
gic points often occur where axial lines con- Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta.
verge, thus axial analysis has been called the
“workhorse of urban analysis,” (Major, Hillier Methodology& Hanson, 1998). Key measures derived from
axial analysis include integration, “the degree Researchers performed a comparative evalua-
to which each line in the map is present on the tion between Syntax2D and some of its com-
simplest (fewest changes of direction) routes petitors through comparisons of functionality,
to and from all other lines,” connectivity, “the usability, and aesthetics to gain an overview of
number of lines that intersect with each line differences that may be addressed in the next
in the system,” and mean depth, “the number development cycle.
of changes of direction any line in a system
Syntax2D has many features, specifcally when is away from a selected line,” (Major, Hillier
considering the types of analyses (path analy-& Hanson, 1998). The reliability of axial line
sis or axial line analysis) it can perform. In this analysis has often been called into question
comparison researchers will be focusing on the because axial lines were not, until recently,
user interface and analysis type features, but algorithmically generated but drawn by hand
also which operating systems are supported (Desyllas & Duxbury, 2001).
and how each integrates with other software
Applications for space syntax are numerous. being used. In the user interface comparison,
In addi