Download the Full Version of textbook for Fast Typing at textbookfull.

com

Five Design Sheets Creative Design and Sketching

for Computing and Visualisation 1st Edition
Jonathan C. Roberts

https://textbookfull.com/product/five-design-sheets-
creative-design-and-sketching-for-computing-and-
visualisation-1st-edition-jonathan-c-roberts/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Download More textbook Instantly Today - Get Yours Now at textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Computing the Environment Digital Design Tools for

Simulation and Visualisation of Sustainable Architecture
1st Edition Brady Peters
https://textbookfull.com/product/computing-the-environment-digital-
design-tools-for-simulation-and-visualisation-of-sustainable-
architecture-1st-edition-brady-peters/
textboxfull.com

Data Visualisation A Handbook for Data Driven Design Andy

Kirk

https://textbookfull.com/product/data-visualisation-a-handbook-for-
data-driven-design-andy-kirk/

textboxfull.com

Data Visualisation: A Handbook For Data Driven Design Andy

Kirk

https://textbookfull.com/product/data-visualisation-a-handbook-for-
data-driven-design-andy-kirk-2/

textboxfull.com

Museums and Design for Creative Lives 1st Edition Suzanne

Macleod

https://textbookfull.com/product/museums-and-design-for-creative-
lives-1st-edition-suzanne-macleod/

textboxfull.com
Presto Sketching The Magic of Simple Drawing for Brilliant
Product Thinking and Design 1st Edition Ben Crothers

https://textbookfull.com/product/presto-sketching-the-magic-of-simple-
drawing-for-brilliant-product-thinking-and-design-1st-edition-ben-
crothers/
textboxfull.com

Digital design in action : creative solutions for

designers 1st Edition Ciolek

https://textbookfull.com/product/digital-design-in-action-creative-
solutions-for-designers-1st-edition-ciolek/

textboxfull.com

Generative Art with JavaScript and SVG: Utilizing Scalable

Vector Graphics and Algorithms for Creative Coding and
Design (Design Thinking) 1st Edition David Matthew
https://textbookfull.com/product/generative-art-with-javascript-and-
svg-utilizing-scalable-vector-graphics-and-algorithms-for-creative-
coding-and-design-design-thinking-1st-edition-david-matthew/
textboxfull.com

Tragic Design The Impact of Bad Design and How to Fix It

1st Edition Jonathan Shariat

https://textbookfull.com/product/tragic-design-the-impact-of-bad-
design-and-how-to-fix-it-1st-edition-jonathan-shariat/

textboxfull.com

Statistics and experimental design for toxicologists

Shayne C. Gad

https://textbookfull.com/product/statistics-and-experimental-design-
for-toxicologists-shayne-c-gad/

textboxfull.com
Jonathan C. Roberts
Christopher J. Headleand
Panagiotis D. Ritsos

Five Design-Sheets:
Creative Design
and Sketching
for Computing
and Visualisation
Five Design-Sheets: Creative Design and Sketching
for Computing and Visualisation
Jonathan C. Roberts • Christopher J. Headleand
Panagiotis D. Ritsos

Five Design-Sheets: Creative

Design and Sketching for
Computing and Visualisation

123
Jonathan C. Roberts Christopher J. Headleand
Bangor University University of Lincoln
Bangor, UK Lincoln, UK

Panagiotis D. Ritsos
Bangor University
Bangor, UK

ISBN 978-3-319-55626-0 ISBN 978-3-319-55627-7 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-55627-7

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017940639

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface

One of the many challenges that programmers face is knowing how to start, when
setting out to solve a computing problem. For instance, when we give our computing
students programming assignments, many of them leave the development of their
code until the last minute, just because they do not know how or where to start.
Starting a project, or a programming assessment, is often the hardest part to the
problem. When we (the authors) are faced with problems ourselves, whether for
work or at home, we have often found ourselves reaching for sheets of paper to
make sketches, draw a rough plan and take some notes down. The very act of putting
pen to paper helps us think through the problem in a deeper way. It is these initial
sketches, done on a back of an envelope (so to speak), that help us get our creative
juices starting; they help us to quickly express our ideas and also quickly reject
them.
Each of us is different in how we do this creative thinking. Jonathan will get
his drawing pens out of his bag, reach for his pad of A3 sheets of drawing paper,
write down words to explore the landscape and draw a quick diagram. Chris, on the
other hand, will jump to the wipe board, clean it off from the previous conversation
and draw large pictures on the board, while Panos will pull up a mind-mapping or
graphical editor on his computer, type in a few categories and brainstorm different
phrases, and draw a picture on the screen. While we are different with regard to the
tools that we use, we all are planning and thinking creatively, trying to work through
the problem in our minds, using different depictions to externalize and perpetuate
our thoughts. We are considering alternative solutions and ascertaining which is the
best one to follow. We are organizing our thoughts into our courses of actions or
grouping them into strategies.
Any of our methods could be used on its own or in combination with the
others. These tools (sketching, wipe board or graphics program) help us, not only
to work our ideas through but also to share them and communicate them to others.
Indeed, group work can often be beneficial because you can collectively draw upon
everyone’s knowledge and ideas. Other times this can be problematic, with some
people pushing their idea for their own interest or itinerary, rather than working
toward the common, collective good.

v
vi Preface

Fig. 1 Working through an algorithm to manipulate three-dimensional data

The challenge with these techniques being used on their own, however good they
may be, is that they are ad hoc. There is no specific structure for drawing on a
wipe board or for sketching. An empty wipe board or a sheet of paper is merely a
blank starting point. But structure is very important for group activities, as it allows
the group to follow the same guidelines. Structure is also especially beneficial to
students who are learning – as a method can be taught, the students know what
to do by repeating the steps of the method and they can be assessed on how well
they implemented it. So, how can we provide a structure over the sketching and
critical design process? What would it look like? What information will the structure
contain? We believe that such a structure will help students learn how to plan and
think through alternatives for building software interfaces. It will help learners to
have a method that they can apply and reapply. It will help companies, who are
building interfaces, exchange and compare ideas and different solutions.
Drawing and sketching have always been an important part of human expression.
Just consider Leonardo da Vinci who created many beautiful notebooks of his
ideas. These books are still inspiring researchers and inventors today, in art and
design of tools and mechanical devices. Likewise, we have used sketchbooks to
record events and develop our thoughts. We start our story in October 1992 when
Jonathan was studying for his PhD. It was during this time that he started to use
research notebooks. These were A4 glue-bound hardback notebooks that were
ruled. Jonathan can remember walking to every meeting with his notebook and
pen. Every page started with the date of that meeting and every event started on
a new page. Meetings, conferences, thoughts, ideas, concepts, diagrams, etc. all
Preface vii

made it into the notebooks. Importantly, sketches formed an important part of the
recording process. At the time, Jonathan was investigating methods to render and
explore three-dimensional datasets, such as those from magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI) or computed tomography (CT) scans. It was only a few years earlier that
Lorensen and Cline had published the marching cubes1 algorithm. Jonathan can
remember drawing many sketches of how to visualise and render three-dimensional
data (Fig. 1). These algorithms were eventually included into the Waltz visualisation
system, to manipulate and analyze three-dimensional data. An early sketch of the
Waltz interface (dated March 1995) is shown in Fig. 2a. This was used as a “plan”
to help design the interface (Fig. 2b). It was used not only to work out the final
appearance but also to help plan the individual aspects of the code.
Drawing, sketching and design are always featured in all our teaching and
work. We pick up the story, once again, in 2007. Jonathan had just moved to
Bangor University and set up a graduate module on information visualisation. It
was during this module that Jonathan started to develop the Five Design-Sheet
sketching methodology. We needed a method to allow students to plan their data
visualisation tools. At first, the methodology was informal and merely encouraged
students to make sketches to plan their goals. But after refining the module and
the technique over several years, the format and advice of sketching and planning
interfaces were gradually developed. At the same time, Chris completed a degree
in education and design. He joined Harlech College, where he developed and led
a creative technologies course. Panos was working for the industry as a software
engineer, having completed his PhD in 2006. From 2011 and over the next few
years, we see the coming together of many events. The first Five Design-Sheets2
paper was published; Panos moved to Bangor to work with Jonathan, and then
Chris followed. Working collaboratively, we started to generalise and develop the
Five Design Sheet further. The outcome of this process was our journal paper on
“Sketching Designs Using the Five Design-Sheet Methodology”3 that was presented
at the IEEE Visualisation Conference in 2015.
Collectively we realised that together we had a common interest in design,
sketching, professional development and encouraging others to develop good
software. It is these aspects that have motivated us to write this book. Not only
does the Five Design-Sheet methodology provide a useful structure for students and
learners to follow in an academic setting, but it can also be helpful for those doing
research and development of new software tools and those developing software in
companies. Moreover, it is not only the mere act of sketching that is important, but
it is the thinking that surrounds the sketching of an idea. What is often difficult

1
Lorensen, W.E. and Cline, H.E., 1987, August. Marching cubes: A high resolution 3D surface
construction algorithm. In ACM SIGGRAPH computer graphics (Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 163–169).
ACM.
2
Roberts, J.C., 2011. The Five Design-Sheet (FdS) Approach for Sketching Information Visualiza-
tion Designs. Proc. Eurographics Education Papers, pp. 27–41.
3
Roberts, J.C., Headleand, C. and Ritsos, P.D., 2016. Sketching designs using the Five Design-
Sheet methodology. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 22(1), pp. 419–428.
viii Preface

Fig. 2 The Waltz visualisation tool. (a) Sketches were first made that plan and explain the
interface. (b) The sketches provide a vision for the completed tool. Both sketch and the Waltz
tool were created by Jonathan Roberts while studying for his doctor of philosophy (PhD) thesis,
University of Kent, 1995
Preface ix

is knowing where ideas are initiated from or how to think through ethical and
professional issues that surround a problem. We have experienced this firsthand.
We have each worked on projects and developed software where we have had to
think through the challenges, grapple with ethical issues and develop appropriate
solutions. We see this everyday in our students, especially those who are doing
projects and find it difficult to ideate different concepts and think through the
problem. Creative thinking is not a skill that many have. But it is a skill that
we believe can be learned, especially with some help and advice. We do feel,
however, that there should be more design thinking within the curriculum and a
wider adoption of creative thinking alongside critical thinking in education and
at every level. Things are starting to change, and we are gradually seeing more
sketching, creativity, and planning by design in difficult curricula.
Furthermore, we feel that ethical concerns should be looked at more closely, and
that being ethical and professional in school and academia and in the workplace
is becoming increasingly multifaceted while always remaining important. For
instance, the threat of cybercrimes and cyberbullying is increasing. It is therefore
beneficial for programmers to understand and appreciate how such issues may
affect their designs. While professionalism is part of the curriculum in many
higher education computing courses, students often ignore the related concepts and
implications and do not engage with the material in a truly thoughtful manner. One
challenge they face is that there are few resources that integrate design thinking
with professional considerations. Significantly, we believe that along with design
thinking, professional thinking should be incorporated into the design phase and
especially considered from the start. Consequently, we include chapters that discuss
a range of such issues faced by the developer.
To write the book, we have drawn upon our wide range of knowledge and
skills and many years of experiences within education, teaching and industry.
Collectively, we have experience in leading and mentoring undergraduate, master,
and research (PhD) students and leading and evaluating different computing
modules (from computer programming, graphics and information Visualisation
modules, algorithms, Web design, and Web programming to artificial intelligence
and professional perspectives). We have developed degree programs and led them
through accreditation. We have been external examiners, examining courses and
PhD students at different universities. We also draw upon the experience and
knowledge of many authors, from related literature. As you read, take a note of
related work that you can follow and read at a later stage.
Through our refinement of the Five Design-Sheet method (over the past 8 years
or more), we have also generalised the techniques from being totally focused on
information visualisation tools to also using the method for interactive software
development. We need to be true to the past of the FdS, and so we will include many
examples focusing on the development of data visualisation tools. But we also think
(actually we hope) that the methods and ideas we discuss here could be used for
new applications. We hope that you will be able to take the method and adapt it
x Preface

for your purpose. Finally, we take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank all the
students who have helped us develop the Five Design-Sheet method and have trailed
our processes throughout the years. Without you, this book would not be possible.

Bangor, UK Jonathan C. Roberts

Lincoln, UK Christopher J. Headleand
Bangor, UK Panagiotis D. Ritsos
Contents

Part I Think
1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Think, Prep, Sketch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Focused Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.4 What Software Tools Can You Build, as a Result
of this Process? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.5 Think: In Your Minds-Eye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.6 Design by Sketching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.7 Developing Your Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.8 How to Read this Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2 Overview of the Five Design-Sheets (FdS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.1 Introduction to the FdS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.2 The Design By-Sketching Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3 Take Time and Develop Your Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.4 Thinking Holistically. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.5 History of the FdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.6 Who Has Used the FdS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.6.1 Teachers Can Use the FdS in an Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.6.2 Project Students, Creating a Chapter on Their
Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.6.3 In a Company Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.7 Will It Work for Non-Visual Interface Development? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3 Thoughts, Ideas, Problems and Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.1 Types of Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2 On Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.3 Fast and Slow Thinking of Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

xi
xii Contents

3.4 The Importance of Reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

3.5 Reflection, Metacognition and Critical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.6 Problem Solving Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
3.7 Characterising Problems (Well-Structured vs. Ill-Structured) . . . . . 61
3.8 Being a Convergent and Critical Thinker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3.9 Divergent Thinking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.10 Enthusiasm and Attitude to Thinking, Problem Solving and
Creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3.11 Thinking, Problem Solving and the FdS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
3.12 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4 Social, Ethical and Other Considerations to Interface Design . . . . . . . . 85
4.1 Our Self, Our Identity and Foresight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.2 Triage: Making a Quick Judgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
4.3 Can You Do It? Resources, Utility, Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
4.3.1 Can You: Do You Have the Resources? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4.3.2 Can You: Is There Utility? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
4.3.3 Can You: Do You Have Authority? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
4.4 Should You Do It? – Is It Ethical? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
4.5 What If You? – Any Ramifications?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
4.5.1 Business Response: Is There a Product? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
4.5.2 Emotive Response: How Will People View It? . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4.6 Thinking Through Issues, Use an Acronym! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.7 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

Part II Prep
5 Sketching Design Skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5.1 Sketching as a Way to Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
5.2 But I Cannot Draw! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
5.3 Getting a Kit Together . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
5.4 Pens, Ink and Colour Washes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
5.5 Why Is Sketching Useful? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
5.6 Techniques: Bold Lines and Faint Lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
5.7 Improving and Enhancing Your Sketches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
5.8 Other Mediums: Different Types of Low-Fidelity Prototyping . . . . 141
5.9 Sketching Alone or in a Group? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
5.10 Sketching Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
5.11 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
6 Graphical Marks and Semiology for Sketching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
6.1 Developing a Visual (Sketching) Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
6.2 Graphical Marks and Gestalt Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Contents xiii

6.3 Graphical Semiotics: Arbitrary Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

6.4 Graphical Semiotics: Sensory Signals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
6.5 Graphical Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
6.6 Graphical Encapsulation and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
6.7 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
7 Creative Thinking, Creativity and Ideation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
7.1 Aim to Generate Many Ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
7.2 Telling a Story with Sketches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
7.3 Idea Generation: And Getting in the Right Mindset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
7.4 Encouraging a Creative Mindset and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
7.5 The Importance of Sleep and Resting the Mind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
7.6 Ideas from Nature: Mimicking and Bioinspiration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
7.7 Ideas from Man-Made Structures and Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
7.8 Techniques to Help Find Alternative Ideas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
7.9 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206

Part III Sketch

8 Sheet 1 of the Five Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
8.1 Get Prepared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
8.2 Framing the Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
8.3 How to Frame the Problem? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
8.4 The Journey of Sheet 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
8.5 Ideas (Start with the Salient Features). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
8.6 Ideas (Using Other Frameworks: Top-Down Thinking) . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
8.7 Ideas (Focusing on Tasks: Bottom-Up Thinking). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
8.8 Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
8.9 Categorise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
8.10 Combine and Refine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
8.11 Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
8.12 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
9 Sheets 2, 3 and 4 (The Middle Sheets) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
9.1 Pause and Deliberate on the Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
9.2 Starting Sheets 2, 3 and 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
9.3 The Big Picture of the Puzzle Game Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
9.4 Examples of the Big Picture Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
9.4.1 Technologies and Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
9.4.2 User Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
9.4.3 Designs That Focus on Animation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
9.5 Operations and Components of the System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
9.6 The Parti (The Main Focus). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
xiv Contents

9.7 Pros and Cons of Each Design Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274

9.8 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
10 Sheet 5 (Design Realisation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
10.1 Which Alternative Design? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
10.1.1 Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
10.1.2 Fit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
10.1.3 Usable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
10.1.4 Useful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
10.1.5 Aesthetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
10.1.6 Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
10.1.7 Eco-Friendly and Sustainable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
10.1.8 Unique. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
10.1.9 Buildable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
10.2 Creating the Final Design Realisation Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
10.3 Delivering and Using the Realisation Sheet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
10.4 Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
11 Five Design-Sheet Examples and Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
11.1 Worked Example of the FdS (Heritage Scenario) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
11.1.1 Heritage Example: Sheet 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
11.2 Heritage Example: Sheets 2, 3, 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
11.3 Worked Example of the FdS
(Explanatory Visualisation Scenario) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
11.4 Visualisation Example: Sheet 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
11.5 Visualisation Example: Sheets 2, 3, 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
11.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
Part I
Think
Chapter 1
Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

Abstract There are many situations when you need to plan and think through
a range of different ideas, strategies, or courses of action. Often, your task is to
find the right tools, or approach for a job and plan a solution to the problem at
hand. In other situations is it useful to work through different permutations in your
mind and decide which idea is the best to implement. Often though, it is initially
difficult to know which design is best and how to proceed. This certainly applies to
programmers, when they design and develop visual computer interactive interfaces,
or visualisation tools that display big data. In particular, software engineers need
often to consider various alternative designs and layouts, before they even think
about beginning to program. In this book we present a method that will enable
you to contemplate, decide upon and communicate different approaches and ideas.
We call it the Five-Designs Sheet methodology, as it is based around sketching
alternative designs in five structured sheets. Through presenting this method, we
discuss techniques to help you contemplate your ideas, combine them to devise
more complex plans and depict them in sketches. These sketches can them be
implemented as interface solutions. This chapter covers the main concepts explored
in the book and the different skills that we wish you to learn, including: (1) thinking
through ideas, (2) preparing to sketch and (3) sketching different ideas and using the
Five Design-Sheet methodology for design-thinking.

1.1 Introduction

When in the early stages of designing an interface for a software application, it

is often difficult to envision what it will look like. There may be many possible
layouts, or a number of different ways that a user could interact with your tool. Any
of these possible alternatives could be implemented and each may have potential as
a usable system. Some designs will end up being more popular and the users will
go back and use them again-and-again, whereas other tools may be used once and
never again open. Coming up with those designs and possibly building more than
one alternatives will take much time and require effort, cost you (or the company
you are working for) lots of money. Obviously, when you are planning to build
something, you want to make the end result useful, worthwhile, fit for its purpose,
while keeping overall costs minimum. It would seem sensible to plan as much as

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 3

J.C. Roberts et al., Five Design-Sheets: Creative Design and Sketching
for Computing and Visualisation, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-55627-7_1
4 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

you can before you proceed with the (usually expensive) implementation of the
solution. But there is a balance to maintain. You do not want to limit development
in deadline sensative applications, but you want to spent as much time in the
planning process as possible so as to maximise the efficiency, and success of the
development process. Furthermore, you do not want to get into a situation where
your designs are impossible to build, due to unconsidered technical constraints from
an immature design concept. There is a compromise to be made. You need to have
a well considered plan that can be used by you (or other people) to build your idea.
Many of today’s software engineers use Agile techniques, where the software is
built in close collaboration with users or client. The software development moves
forward at a fast pace, and the outputs are rigorously and frequently tested. Yet,
software engineers still need to get to a situation where they can start this building
process. If you are the developer, you need to know what the end-product may look
like, how users will interact with it, and how it should connect with other software.
You need, at least, to create a vision document, which records the ideas that you
have had, ideas that you have rejected (for whatever reasons) and ideas that you
have explored in great detail. In fact, not only is it useful to record these ideas, but
you will need to have elements of it down on paper, such to confirm the design idea
to your client or supervisor.
Systematic planning of what to build, and thinking over the advantages and
disadvantages of alternative design solutions is essential in many fields. Not only is
design-thinking useful for software engineers, but it is beneficial when you design
and prototype a new piece of hardware, using bread-boards or printed-circuit boards.
It can be useful when you are looking to re-design a product, or look to adapt and
improve existing products. We do acknowledge that throughout this book we focus
on the creation of interactive software tools, and use the case study of building data-
visualisation tools. However, we have tried to keep the techniques general enough
such that this book would be useful for a wide range of people, with different
challenges and different situations, and for different applications.
This book explores design by sketching and describes the Five Design-Sheet
(FdS) methodology [8]. By following the methodology you will produce five sheets
which develop designs from initial ideation through to a final concept. Sheet 1
provides a workflow to explore the idea space, where creativity can flow and where
lots of different ideas are generated. Sheets 2, 3 and 4 develop these ideas further,
while Sheet 5 is used to refine a implementable solution. It is through sketching
that you will understand more about the issues, opportunities and challenges of the
design task.
The book follows the general structure of the methodology, supported by
additional material. In Part I – Thinking, after a discussion and overview of the
methodology we present aspects that you need to consider before tackling the FdS.
Then Part – Preparation, and in Part III – Sketching, where we present chapters that
discuss each of the sheets (sheets 1 then 2, 3 and 4 together, followed by a chapter
on sheet 5).
1.2 Think, Prep, Sketch 5

1.2 Think, Prep, Sketch

At the start of any project you need to have a vision; a concept of where you are
heading. In your mind you have an idea of what the tool you develop could look
like in the end, and your imagination allows you to envision how it could fit in
with other software and tools. Often at the start of any development, this vision is
not concrete, it is approximate and abstract. But even a rough, approximate vision
affords us many features. It allows us to extrapolate the ideas and work through any
problems. It allows us to plan out different aspects of the programming task, which
could be given to other people.
Many ideas start off small. Indeed back-of-an-envelope sketches are often the
starting point to a new endeavour. These sketched ideas could be initiated by a brief
encounter and discussion with someone over (say) a meal. In this situation your
mind is free-wheeling, it is relaxing, you are talking about your day, your friends,
sports, politics and how cool your new gadget is. It is during these times that you
come up with an idea. You apply it to a problem that your subconscious mind has
been working on in the background. This idea may actually be an amalgamation
of many other ideas. It may be bringing together different concepts. Your brain
merely puts different parts of those ideas into order. Sketching down these ideas, or
anything that assists your thought process and brainstorming is important. Indeed,
many designers suggest that you should have a pad of paper and a pen with you at
all times, such that you can write down the ideas when you have them, on the spot.
In fact, we highly support this form of sketching. It is timely and necessary, and
these sketches can be developed further. We will talk further about where and how
ideas are created in Chap. 7 about Idea creation.
Other times the ideas come to fruition because you have worked hard and focused
on a problem. This is a deliberate form of thinking. Leonardo de Vinci wrote “It
has long since come to my attention that people of accomplishment rarely sat back
and let things happen to them. They went out and happened to things” [11]. It is
deliberate thinking because you have spent conscious effort and time, pondering
and considering the idea, and working through all possibilities. In this situation you
can afford be more systematic and rigorous over the design process. For instance,
you can first do some research into your challenge, and see what other people have
done and achieved. You would need to take notes from this research, start to write
(or sketch) the main concepts, and work through different ideas. You are systematic
in how you have written these ideas, and you would put thought into how these can
be placed into a categorisation. You start off with a categorisation of five parts (for
instance) and then refine this category into (say) three categories.
These two types of thought represent fast and slow thinking (see Kahneman [6]).
If you are thinking fast then you are most likely acting intuitively. You draw on your
experience and your knowledge to make decisions and choices. Kahneman calls this
“System 1” thinking. The thoughts associated with system 1 are automatic. They
are routine. We make decisions based on the available information. The second type
of thinking is slow, and Kahneman labels this as “System 2”. It is deliberate and
6 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

requires more effort. Slowing down and being more deliberate can deter us from
making rash and unfortunate decisions. System 2 thinking is rational and is focused
on critical-thinking. We need to concentrate hard on finding solutions to a particular
problem. In creative discovery we need both. We need to be fast in our thinking, to
find the easy and quick answers, but also we need to put effort into our thinking,
such to classify and organize our thoughts and ideas appropriately.
However these ideas have been initiated – whether they started as back-of-an-
envelope sketches, or through sustained effort – you will still need to further refine
them. You will need to ascertain how they fit in with current practices, and make
judgements to decide whether the chose solution is going to be appropriate and
useful. These ideas will need to be further planned, fleshed-out and elaborated.
Additional detail will have to be added. If you are to give a sketch of your idea
to a developer, to build, then you will be probably required to add additional detail,
to explain your idea.
This is a process. You will start off with ideas, make preparation and do further
research, and then create the final design documents. In this book, the final output
we will be creating is a set of sketches. Indeed, for any project you will have three
stages: you will make steps to think through different ideas, you will then need to
plan and make preparation of what you are building to confirm to you (and others,
that your ideas are suitable), and finally you will need to sketch your plans to make
them concrete, such that you can implement the software or commission it (for
example). Consequently, this book is split into these three parts: Think, Prep, Sketch,
see Fig. 1.1.
Thinking. There are many aspects to thinking. Some thoughts are creative and
enable new ideas to be generated. Other thoughts we have are critical, and help
us question our ideas. Different types of thinking are required at different stages.
Whatever type of thinking we are referring to at a particular time, enables us,
as software developers to consider many different aspects of the engineering
process. Often, programmers are too keen to get started, which can lead them
to head off on a wrong path. Especially some student learners are so keen to
just get coding that they end-up missing what the main functionality of the tool
should be, ending up with low marks in related assessments. But a little thought
up-front can help a great deal with the appropriateness and effectiveness of the

Fig. 1.1 The book is divided into three parts. Part I covers the vision, where you need to think
and imagine what the idea could look like consider the advantages and disadvantages of an idea
in comparison with others. Part , details what specific preparation you should make, such to create
good designs. Part III covers the Five Design-Sheet methodology in detail, with separate chapters
for each sheet, and looks to further reading and examples of people using the FdS approach
1.2 Think, Prep, Sketch 7

end result. Towards this goal, we explore how we can initiate new ideas, and how
we can engender creative thinking. In this part we also discuss ethical issues and
any ramifications of you doing the work. We ask “can you?”, “should you?”, and
“what if you?” do the work and build the tool.
Prep. The second part covers specific actions that you should do in preparation
before the FdS. The first skill we will investigate is sketching. We will cover more
detail on why sketch, skills to improve your sketching, and also different medium
for sketching or low-fidelity planning. As authors, we have been researching
(among other things) how to develop visualisation tools and create new data-
visualisation algorithms. An important aspect of thinking about new visualisation
tools is to make sure that you understand the data that you have. Therefore
as preparation for doing the FdS we will look at data analysis. We will cover
questions such as: What requirements are there on the tool? What does the client
want? What is the task of the tool? What data do you have or require to implement
the tool?
Sketching. While we can think about the ideas in our mind, we need a way to
record them. It is often through this very act of recording of our ideas that we
realise how these can be improved or whether they are fit for purpose. One way
to display the ideas is to create a fully-rendered, picture of our vision. Such
computer-rendered images are useful, because they can be used to see exactly
what an interface, object or building may look like. However, these full-rendered
versions often look too finished, making people who see them less likely to
question the depicted ideas and their suitability in tackling the problem at hand.
On the contrary, what we want is a way to record our ideas yet still be
able to tweak on them, refine and improve them, and allow people to readily
contribute and challenge them. Sketching our designs provides this half-way-
house. It enables us to record our ideas and exchange them with others, while
its approximate and unfinished state invites people to contribute, making it
more that they will question, refine and adapt them. Following the Five Design-
Sheet method we work through sketching initial design ideas, planning them in
more detail, and finally presenting the realisation design sheet that can be then
implemented by yourself or given to someone else to build.
Throughout these three stages we are not advocating that you should do all the
thinking first and then do sketching. Instead, we strongly suggest that sketching
becomes part of the thought process, and that you will need to contemplate about
your solution throughout each part of the FdS. The thinking that we are advocating
at the first stage is more about preparing your mind and thinking through different
issues that could possibly occur. We are trying to get you to make ‘what if’
questions. For example, “if I build this tool, would it be usable?”, “if I build this
tool, how will it be integrated into current systems that the company uses?”. We are
encouraging you to be critical about your ideas. We are asking you to perform a
critical analysis of what could be. We are thinking through different combinations
and different possibilities in our minds-eye.
8 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

Naturally, when you start a project you will have many questions in your mind.
These questions will be vague and general. You will be thinking over the challenge,
what to build, and how you can gather your thoughts together. Indeed, if you
have been tasked with building the tool – for instance, you could be a student
doing an assessment – then some of these questions may already be posed by the
requirements document that your teacher has given you. Some of these could include
the following:
• So what are you going to build?
• What have you been asked to build?
• What ideas do you have in your mind?
• What challenge are you trying to solve?
• Where do ideas come from?
When you have decided what idea you are working through, then you need to
start to be more specific. Here you need to make firm the requirements of the tool.
Consider where it will be used by the user. You especially need to consider questions
over ethical considerations of the tool. Questions such as the following come to
mind:
• What will the tool look like in the end?
• What have other people done? (research)
• Do you already have a solution to your challenge?
• Are the ideas ethical?
• Are the ideas suitable?
• Will they make a good product?
• Will they work with existing software?
• Do you have any specific requirements to the solution?
• Where will the tools be used, what environment and location?
Finally, you will need to work through the ideas that you have in your mind and
make them into usable plans. We use sketching and sheets of paper to articulate the
designs. At the end of the process you should be able to take your ideas and build
the tool; the concepts should be valid, fit the requirements and have been properly
considered for their worth and value.
• How will you record your ideas?
• How will you work with clients?
• How will you plan out your idea solutions?
• How many component parts are there to your solution?
• Is it actually possible to build the ideas?
• How can you take your ideas and implement them?
• Can you give your ideas to others to implement?
All these are relevant questions, and all need you to have a vision (or many) of
what the tool will look like. This book will lead you through contemplating this
vision (or visions), and help you make suitable plans to build the tool.
1.3 Focused Learning 9

1.3 Focused Learning

As educators we support focused learning and deliberate practice [2]. We want you
to focus on design, particularly design-by-sketching, and deliberately direct your
thoughts to consider different solutions. We wish you to pro-actively learn new skills
and to purposefully practice these skills as you go through this book. We help you
on this journey by providing a set of exercises at the end of every chapter. These
exercises help you to focus your knowledge and deliberately practice the skills that
we have been discussing in that chapter. We also want you to develop your critical
thinking skills, help you to better prepare and develop your sketching abilities. The
more you perform a Five Design-Sheet plan, the better you understand what to put
on the sheets and how to record your ideas.
There has been much talk about how long it takes to become an expert. For
example, Erricson [2] and colleagues presented some excellent work describing a
basic rule of 10 years of involvement needed, for becoming an expert. Likewise,
Malcolm Gladwell [4] in his book titled “Outliers” talks about the need for 10;000 h.
It may seem obvious, regarding some skills, where this would be true. Musicians
need to practice long hours to improve their skills and to master playing a particular
instrument. In other situations there may also be an advantage from genetics. For
example, we can imagine that basketball players may be generally advantaged if
they are taller. One counter argument is they may developed physically earlier than
most of their peers, and thus, because of their physique, were selected early as being
promising individuals in basketball. Therefore they may had more time to practice
and become experts sooner than others!
Superior performance by very young children without prior instruction may suggest excep-
tional promise, leading to the early onset of training. This in turn leads to a consistently
greater accumulation of practice (and hence, by our framework, performance) relative to
later-starting individuals. Ericsson et al. [2]

As a reader, you may be feeling that you will not be able to give over 10;000 h
to developing your design and sketching skills, and in fact, you did sketching as a
child and found it difficult. But, the figure of 10;000 h somewhat masks the main
point: that it is not about putting hours and hours into mindless practice, rather it
is being focused on the task. What we want is for you to try to stay focused on
the target and make time count. Deliberate practice is also about being mindful and
understanding the process, knowing what you are doing and for what reason. In
our case, we are getting you to learn and develop your skills in design, sketching,
considering new ideas and critical thinking. It means that you understand how you
are improving as a learner yourself. Indeed, we suggest that you keep your ideas and
sketches together in a book or a folder, or you could scan them in to a computer and
keep them electronically. You can look back over previous sketches and see how
you have improved your skills in sketching, have developed your style, and have
ideated new concepts.
As authors, and educators ourselves, we wish to empower you to have the right
knowledge and right skills to do the job. We want you to be an empowered learner.
10 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

Where you feel motivated to learn and develop the necessary skills, feel confident in
what you do and how to apply the techniques that you learn to different (and new)
situations. Throughout this book we want you to think about yourself personally
and how you are learning. To be a self-aware learner. We want you to be passionate
about design, and excited about developing your skills. We want you to be confident
to use the Five Design-Sheet methodology in your own problem solving. To be
self-assured in creating new ideas and work through different solutions that you
are confronted with. We also believe in a constructivist approach, where you as a
learner are involved in your own development. We wish to develop your critical
thinking skills and motivate you to become independent thinkers who are active
learners . This is why we encourage you to pick up a pencil and a pad, and start
taking notes. Start sketching and planning ideas, and work through the exercises at
the end of each chapter. Especially when we discuss design thinking, rather than
merely reading the text, we want you to start sketching. Grab a pad of plain paper
and a black pen and start making notes. Keep your own notebook and put your notes
and sketches in the book. Start sketching different ideas. Turn your imagination to
the challenges or projects that you are working on and do some sketching!

1.4 What Software Tools Can You Build, as a Result of this

Process?

It is useful at this stage to say what visions are possible: what tools can be built, and
what kind of software can be built as a result of this book. Actually, as authors we
do not want to dictate what can (or even what cannot) be built, because there are an
infinite number of possibilities in computer interface design. Also, we acknowledge
that interface development is rapidly changing. The use of non-WIMP1 interfaces is
growing fast [9]. Computer interfaces that use pens (styluses), touch or gestures are
definitely on the rise. We do not exclude any of these interfaces, in fact we embrace
these new types of interaction, and (as researchers) we encourage developers to
develop more tools specifically suitable for these interfaces. Whatever style of
interface you are considering to build, we believe you should still go through the
stages of Thinking, Preparation and Sketching.
The data-visualisation tool is one type of interface that can be built. Figure 1.2
shows a sketch of a visualisation interface that was designed by a student. The sketch
shows a plan of their idea, alongside the completed tool that reads in historic rainfall
data. The user can load the data which is displayed at several levels of aggregation,
from one year, individual weeks in the year, to several years. The visualisation
shows data in several panels, and demonstrates the quantity of rainfall in Britain
from 1911 to 1933. The visualisation tool allows a user to display rainfall from a
specific regions in Britain. This figure shows the quantity of rainfall in Wales, which

1
WIMP – Windows Icons Menus Pointers
1.4 What Software Tools Can You Build, as a Result of this Process? 11

Fig. 1.2 On the left, a sketch of the final design taken from Sheet 5 of the FdS. On the right an
implementation using the Processing.org Java library to display rainfall in Britain. It is clear to see
that there are similarities, but also there are differences in the final implementation of the tool

is shown by the colour highlighted in the map at the top. This work was submitted
as part of the Information Visualisation Masters module, and demonstrates how a
student has taken their early sketch ideas and changed them into a working prototype
tool. If we were being critical, then there are several places where the tool could be
made better. For instance, the colour combinations could be improved, the summary
information at the top of the page is extremely small and could be made bigger, and
there is no clear scale or tick marks to indicate the actual quantities of rainfall.
However, it is an excellent example to demonstrate several lessons that we are
expressing. Namely it demonstrates that a student has thought through the challenge,
come up with a design sketch, and then interpreted how to implement the tool.
Data-visualisation tools are not the only type of interactive systems that can
be built. In a web-technology course, students are asked to develop an interactive
tool that will manipulate geometric patterns through an interface. Figure 1.3 shows
the sketch that a student made on their realisation design sheet. The image on the
right shows a picture of their final tool. They chose to focus on geometric patterns
that looked like flowers. It is interesting to see what types of patterns can easily be
generated by very few basic shapes. While each of the results are somewhat similar –
they are circular, and are symmetric – there are still many contrasting visual patterns
that can be created with the tool (see Fig. 1.4).
The tool works in a web browser, uses HTML5 and CSS for the slider controls,
JavaScript for the functionality and interaction, and the graphics is rendered using
Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG). Sure it is a simple tool, but it is an excellent
example of an interactive tool. In fact we can clearly see some basic principles.
12 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

Fig. 1.3 The left image shows a sketch of the layout of a flower pattern generator program that
was sketched by a third-year (final year) computing undergraduate student. They then implemented
a version of their tool (as shown on the right) which allows a user to change different parameters

Fig. 1.4 Examples of geometric patterns created by the pattern-generator tool. While this is
basically a simple interface the flower-pattern tool can still create some interesting patterns

There are buttons to control the interface (the sliders), a position where the results
are placed (the SVG output), and while not visible, there is some underpinning
model that holds the state of the system parameters. In this case the state is a set
of numbers that represent the properties of the petals.
1.4 What Software Tools Can You Build, as a Result of this Process? 13

The pattern generator has been designed with three columns of controllers: colour
controls (on the left of the view), with opacity controls and size controls to the
right. These sliders and buttons control the appearance of the petals, two back, two
middle and two front. The parameter values are stored as variables and represent
the state of the system. The JavaScript code creates the SVG geometry, which is
displayed in the centre. The geometry gets created when the user releases their
mouse click, after sliding a slider or selecting a button. The implementation connects
the interface (the buttons and sliders etc.) to the rendering of the geometry via the
Document Object Model (DOM). The DOM model treats the HTML document
as a tree structure, to allow the program to access and individual elements of the
page. There are certainly many ways to implement this tool. For instance, the
student could have used different JavaScript libraries (such as HTML5 Canvas,
Raphael.js, processing.js, etc.). However the implementation provides us with a
good demonstrator to investigate interfaces in more detail, and to explore general
principles and structures of computer interfaces.
Most interfaces have a similar structures. In a simplistic view, the buttons on the
screen (or the gestures we make) are used to call functions (which provide the logic
and the operations), that then perform some result. Obviously, in reality, there are
many different interaction elements that can be created (such as sliders, buttons,
radio buttons, drag-and-drop etc.). But these interactive elements all share similar
traits. Let us consider a few example interfaces. In a computer driving game the
input could be from the AZ and NM keys to control the car up/down and left/right,
respectively. The program needs to ascertain whether the user wants the car to move
forward, and if it is free to move forward then the outcome is to play the moving
forward animation. If an obstacle is hit, the car crash animation needs to be played.
In another tool, the user wishes to display data (data visualisation), the developer
has created menus to load the data, and buttons to determine how the data is filtered
and mapped onto the output in graphical patterns.
Whatever the interface, similar structures exist. These, in computer science, are
software patterns.2 These patterns are strategies that have been found to be useful
and are generalised, such that they can be applied to many different situations. A
useful pattern for many interfaces is the Model View Controller (MVC) pattern.
(We do acknowledge that there are many variants of the MVC pattern, but for now
let’s keep it simple.) The MVC pattern is useful for user-interface development. The
flower-pattern generator uses the MVC model, and is shown in Fig. 1.5. The Model
is the underlying data that the user is storing or adapting. The View enables the
information to be displayed. It is the actual result of the tool. The Controller part
of the model represents buttons, sliders and other components that manipulate and
control the underpinning model. The driving game can be considered with a similar
pattern. The user controls the car, and the program then needs to decide whether the

2
To look further on software design patterns, see “Design patterns: elements of reusable object-
oriented software” by Gamma et al. [3] and also for data-visualisation “Software design patterns
for information visualisation” by Heer and Agrawala [5]
14 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

observes
VIEW
Variables
graphical Stroke TRUE
Back petals 1 #7ED7E6
display
of model MODEL Back petals 2
Middle petals 1
#F56170
#D937CD
Middle petals 2 #60FF31
Front petals 1 #B0108D
Front petals 2 #901DDA

CONTROLLER manipulates

Fig. 1.5 The flower-pattern tool uses the Model View Controller software design pattern, where
the Controller updates the Model, the Viewer reflects the state of the Model, and the controller
generates the graphics

car crashes or moves forward. For the data-visualisation example the user needs to
have several menus and buttons to control how that information is mapped from the
data elements onto the graphical elements. Maybe a suite of buttons could be used
to change the colourmap of the data, whereby the button switches the view from
showing data in a greyscale colourmap, to that of a white to blue scale.
The idea of patterns is useful and relevant to us in this book. When learning
computing programming and developing interactive systems it is often useful to
follow a pattern. Many interface developers follow the MVC pattern (or a variant)
to create suitable interfaces. The structure enables developers to work separately,
yet together on the same problem. The structure enables code to be more easily
re-used, and new people (who need to pick up your code at a later stage) can easily
understand how components are connected. While we are not necessarily advocating
that the MVC pattern is useful for all situations, it is a good starting point.
The Five Design-Sheet method, that we discuss in great detail in Chap. 2, is also
a pattern: it is a general method, which can be applied to a wide range of situations.
The FdS has a series of steps to help you think about the problem at hand, in small
steps. It can be re-used and once learned can be exchanged and applied as a model
with other people. Sheets 2, 3, 4 and 5 all have a similar structure, that enable you to
detail the Vision (Big Picture), Components (and operations of the functions), and
what the main functions do and how they are created. By doing this planning you
are able to think through the functionality of the interfaces, what they would look
like, and how they could perform.

1.5 Think: In Your Minds-Eye

While the act of imagining new design solutions can be demanding, it can also be
a fun and rewarding experience. Such solutions can be insightful designs, futuristic,
unconventional or unusual. They can be made out of any material, include any
1.5 Think: In Your Minds-Eye 15

components, and work in any way that your imagination can handle! In your mind
there are no limits, no one to stop you from imagining the impossible. This my
sounds like a thought experiment. On the one hand it is – we are actually advocating
the use of creative visualisation. We are asking you to use your imagination, and to
consider in your mind what the idea will look like and what it will do.
Let us do a little exercise now. Imagine that you have a two-dimensional white
square that is hovering just in front of your head. Now, along with the square,
imagine that you have a round drill bit. The drill is quite large, yet not too sharp. Use
the drill to carve holes, with their vertical axis in parallel to the square plane, into
the four sides of the square. This shape now looks like an idealized jigsaw piece.
Now you can easily duplicate this shape. Make a 2  5 grid of these shapes, and
place them next to each other. In this grid formation, colour them in different shades
of grey, from a light grey on the left to a dark grey on the right. Once you have done
this, you can open your eyes and look to the Fig. 1.6. Look at the picture that we
drew and see if it matches with the picture held in your imagination.
The picture you have considered in your mind may be slightly different, but
hopefully not much. You would have needed to create a virtual plane in three-
dimensional space to put your two-dimensional square. You would have needed
to make assumptions over how large the square is – but probably you would have

Drill-bit

Square Intersections Result

Fig. 1.6 Imagine that you have a two-dimensional white square that is hovering just in front of
your head. Now cut into the square with a small drill. Now duplicate the result 10 times, placing
them in a grid 2  5, color each one a darker shade of grey
16 1 Introduction: Think, Prep, Sketch

automatically scaled the image to make it fit into your minds-eye! Sure, there will be
differences. Your drill bit may have been sharp. The depth of how much the drill has
entered into the square would be different. As soon as we have mentioned drilling
your mind may have also considered the material that you were cutting into. Maybe
you had imagined wood, or metal. You may have even considered what happened
to the swarf (the remaining material that comes off the object when it is drilled).
Maybe in your imagination you still have the swarf in the picture. The depth of
the cuts could have been different. There are many possible interpretations of this
vision, and in fact, there is no wrong answer. It is just that one persons imagination
is different to another person. What we are doing here is creative visualisation. We
are telling a story, explaining a situation, and in your mind you are painting the
picture.
Creative visualisation is thus a cognitive process, where you generate a visual
mental image of something (with your eyes open or closed). You are forming a
mental image in your mind. You can rotate and manipulate that image in your brain.
At this point, we do note that we are using the word visualisation to refer to the
creation of a mental image of these stories, and that the pictures are not made explicit
in the real world, but rather they are merely imagined by yourself. By forming a
mental image, you can manipulate the idea in your mind, turn it around and look
at it from different angles. You can also start to work out whether it is feasible and
how it could interact with other things. For example, considering the adapted square
that you imagined before. You can now rotate it, overlap it with other versions, cut
out a circle in the centre etc. There are endless possibilities.
These are mental images that you have in your mind. You form such pictures
when you give directions to help someone find a building, when you try to recall
what a person looked like ten years ago, or what they were wearing last week. Many
of the pictures we have in our mind are created from events that happen to us as
individuals. As such, we can remember places, people, buildings, trees and positions
of objects. We often remember these as pictures. While we can recall images, as we
have seen, we can create new thoughts.
These thoughts and ideas are obviously shaped by who we are, our experiences
and knowledge and the environment that we live. In fact, gaining new ideas may
require us to push out of our comfort zone, move us into a new environment, or get
us to meet new people. We will discuss methods that help us create new concepts in
Chap. 7 when we discuss the generation of ideas for interface design. Yet, this book
is more than a methodology for thinking. Yes, we cover idea creation and look where
ideas can be inspired from, but we also cover detail of acting upon and drawing your
ideas such that you and others can use them. By placing the ideas on paper you are
working through the ideas, moulding them and helping them take shape. You are
committing the concepts that are running through your mind on paper. These sheets
of paper then be exchanged and shared with others.
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
 C H A P. XV.
From whence the Name Mathematics originated.

A gain, from whence shall we say this name of mathematics, and

mathematical disciplines, was assigned by the ancients, and what
apt reason can we render of its position? Indeed, it appears to me,
that such an appellation of a science which respects cogitative
reasons, was not, like most names, invented by indifferent persons,
but (as the truth of the case is, and according to report) by the
Pythagoreans alone. And this, when they perceived, that whatever is
called mathesis or discipline, is nothing more than reminiscence;
which does not approach the soul extrinsically, like the images which
rising from sensible objects are formed in the phantasy: nor is it
adventitious and foreign, like the knowledge consisting in opinion,
but it is excited, indeed, from apparent objects, and is perfected
within, by thought intimately converted to itself. And when they
likewise perceived that though reminiscence might be shewn from
many particulars, yet it was evinced in a more eminent manner (as
Plato also says[92]) from the mathematical disciplines. For if any one,
says he, is led into the descriptions, he will there easily prove that
discipline is reminiscence. From whence Socrates also, in the Meno,
shews by this method of arguing, that learning is nothing else than
the soul’s recollection of her inherent reasons. And this, because that
which recollects, is alone the cogitative part of the soul; but this
perfects her essence in the reasons of the mathematical disciplines,
the sciences of which she previously received into herself, though
she does not always energize on their fair variety. Indeed, she
contains them all essentially and occultly; but she produces each of
them when she is freed from the impediments originating from
sense. For sense unites her with divisible objects: the phantasy fills
her with forming motions, and appetite bends her to an indulgent
and luxurious life. But every thing divisible is an obstacle to our self-
conversion. And whatever invests with form, disturbs and offends
that knowledge which is destitute of form. And whatever is
obnoxious to perturbations is an impediment to that energy which is
unimpaired by affections. When, therefore, we have moved all these
from the cogitative power, then shall we be able to understand by
thought itself, the reasons which thought contains: then shall we
become scientific in energy; and unfold our essential knowledge. But
whilst we are captive and bound, and winking with the eye of the
soul, we cannot by any means attain to a perfection convenient to
our nature. Such then is mathesis or discipline: a reminiscence of
the eternal reasons contained in the soul. And the mathematical or
disciplinative science is on this account particularly denominated that
knowledge which especially confers to our reminiscence of these
essential reasons. Hence, the business and office of this science[93],
is apparent from its name. For its duty is to move the inherent
knowledge of the soul; to awaken its intelligence; to purify its
cogitation; to call forth its essential forms from their dormant
retreats; to remove that oblivion and ignorance, which are congenial
with our birth; and to dissolve the bonds arising from our union with
an irrational nature. It plainly leads us to a similitude of that divinity
who presides over this science, who manifests intellectual gifts, and
fills the universe with divine reasons; who elevates souls to intellect,
wakens them as from a profound sleep, converts them by enquiry to
themselves; and by a certain obstetric art, and invention of pure
intellect, brings them to a blessed life. To whom indeed, dedicating
the present work, we here conclude our contemplation of the
mathematical science.
B O O K II.
 C H A P. I.
What Part Geometry is of Mathematics, and what the Matter is of
which it consists.

I n the preceding discourses we have considered those common

properties which respect the whole of the mathematical science;
and this we have done agreeable to the doctrine of Plato; at the
same time collecting such particulars as pertain to our present
design. But consequent to this it is requisite that we should
discourse on geometry itself, and on the proposed institution of the
elements, for the sake of which we have undertaken the whole of
the present work. That geometry then, is a part of the whole of
mathematics, and that it obtains the second place after arithmetic,
since it is perfected and bounded by this, (for whatever in geometry
may be expressed and known, is determined by arithmetical
reasons) has been asserted by the ancients, and requires no long
discussion in the present enquiry. But we also may be able to relate
our opinion on this particular, if we consider what place, and what
essence its subject matter[94] is allotted among the universality of
things. For from a proper survey of this, the power of the science
which knows this subject matter, the utility arising from it, and the
good acquired by its learners, will immediately appear. Indeed, some
one may doubt in what genus of things he ought to place
geometrical matter, so as not to deviate from the truth it contains.
For if the figures concerning which geometry discourses, exist in
sensible natures, and cannot be separated from the dark receptacle
of matter; how can we assert that geometry frees us from sensible
objects, that it brings us to an incorporeal essence, that it accustoms
us to an inspection of intelligibles, and prepares us for intellectual
energy? Where shall we ever survey among sensible objects a point
without parts, or a line destitute of breadth, or a superficies without
profundity, or the equality of lines from the centre to the
circumference; or the multangles, and all the figures of many bases,
concerning which geometry informs us? Lastly, after what manner
can the reasons of such a science remain free from all possible
confutation; since, indeed, sensible forms and figures are susceptive
of the more and the less, are all moveable and mutable, and are full
of material variety; among which equality subsists mixt and confused
with its contrary inequality, and into which things without parts have
proceeded into partition, and interval, darkened with the shades of
matter, and lost in its infinite folds? But if the subjects of geometry
are removed from matter, are pure forms, and are separated from
sensible objects: they will be all of them, without doubt, void of
parts, incorporeal, and destitute of magnitude. For extension, tumor,
and interval, approach to forms, on account of the material
receptacle in which they are involved, and which receives things
destitute of parts, distributed into parts; things void of dimension,
extended into dimension; and immoveable natures accompanied
with motion. How then, if this is the case, shall we cut a right line,
triangle, and circle? How can we speak of the diversities of angles,
and the increments and decrements of triangular and quadrangular
figures? Or how exhibit the contacts of circles or right lines? For all
these evince that the geometric matter consists of parts, and does
not reside among indivisible reasons. Such then are the doubts
concerning the matter of geometry, to which we may add, that Plato
considers the forms of geometry as placed in cogitation; and grants,
that we advance from sensibles to forms of this kind, and that we
rise from sensibles to intellect, though (as we have previously
observed) the reasons subsisting in cogitation are indivisible, are
separated by no interval, and subsist according to the peculiarity of
the soul. But if reasons are to be rendered agreeable to things
themselves, and to the doctrine of Plato, the following division must
be adopted. [95]Every universal, and one thing containing many, is
either naturally disposed to be thought of in particulars, or to appear
such, because it possesses its existence in these; is inseparable from
them; is disposed and distributed in them; and together with these
is either moved, or firmly and immoveably abides. Or it is adapted to
subsist prior to many, and to possess a power of generating
multitude, affording to many things images from itself, being
furnished with a nature destitute of parts, from the essences which it
participates, and raising various participations to secondary natures:
or it is disposed to be formed by thought, from the many, to possess
a generating existence, and to reside in the last place in the many.
For, according to these three modes of subsistence, we shall find, I
think, that some subsist before the many, others in the many, and
others from the relation and predication which they possess to
these. But, that I may absolve all in one word, universal forms being
threefold, we shall consider the differences of that form which many
participate, which exists in many, and fills particular natures
according to its subject matter. Besides this, establishing a twofold
order of participants, one subsisting in sensible objects, but the
other in the phantasy, (since matter is twofold; one indeed, of things
united with sense, but the other of such as fall under the inspection
of phantasy, as Aristotle asserts, in a certain place[96]) we must
allow that the universal, which is distributed in the many, is likewise
twofold. The one, indeed, sensible, as being that which sensible
objects participate; but the other imaginative, as that which subsists
in the many of the phantasy. For the phantasy, on account of its
forming motion, and because it subsists with, and in body, always
receives impressions which are both divided and figured. So that
whatever is known by it, is allotted a correspondent existence: on
which account, Aristotle[97] does not hesitate to call it passive
intellect. But if it is intellect, why is it not impassive, and destitute of
matter? And if it operates with passion, how can it with propriety be
called intellect? For impassivity, indeed, properly belongs to intellect
and an intelligent nature: but passivity is very remote from such an
essence. But (unless I am deceived) Aristotle being willing to explain
its middle nature between cognitions the most primary, and such as
are the last, calls it at the same time intellect, because similar to
primary cognitions, and passive from that alliance which it possesses
with such as are posterior. For first cognitions are indeed destitute of
figures and forms; comprehending in themselves, intelligible natures,
energizing about themselves, united with the objects of knowledge,
and free from all extrinsical impression and passion. But last
cognitions exercise themselves through the medium of instruments,
are rather passions than energies, admit extrinsical knowledge, and
move themselves together with their various subjects. For such (says
Plato) are the sensations which arise from violent passions. But the
phantasy, obtaining a middle centre in the order of cognitions, is
excited, indeed, by itself, and produces that which falls under
cogitation: but because it is not separate from body, it deduces into
partition, interval, and figure, the objects of its knowledge, from the
indivisibility of an intellectual life. Hence, whatever it knows, is a
certain impression and form of intelligence. For it understands the
circle, together with its interval, void, indeed, of external matter, but
possessing intelligible matter. On this account, like sensible matter, it
does not contain one circle only: for we behold in its receptacle,
distance, together with the more and the less, and a multitude of
circles and triangles. If then an universal nature is distributed in
sensible circles, since each of these completes a circular figure, and
they are all mutually similar, subsisting in one reason, but differing in
magnitudes or subjects: in like manner, there is a common
something in the circles, which subsist in the receptacle of the
phantasy, of which all its circles participate, and according to which
they all possess the same form; but in the phantasy they possess
but one difference only, that of magnitude. For when you imagine
many circles about the same centre, they all of them exist in one
immaterial subject and life, which is inseparable from a simple body,
which, by the possession of interval, exceeds an essence destitute of
parts; but they differ in magnitude and parvitude, and because they
are contained and contain. Hence, that universal is twofold, which is
understood as subsisting in the many: one, indeed, in sensible
forms; but the other in such as are imaginative. And the reason of a
circular and triangular figure, and of figure universal, is twofold. The
one subsisting in intelligible, but the other in sensible matter. But
prior to these is the reason which resides in cogitation, and that
which is seated in nature herself. The former being the author of
imaginative circles, and of the one form which they contain; but the
other, of such as are sensible. For there are circles existing in the
heavens, and universally those produced by nature, the reason of
which does not fall under a cogitative distribution. For in incorporeal
causes, things possessing interval, are distinguished by no intervals:
such as are endued with parts, subsist without parts: and
magnitudes without the diffusion of magnitude, as on the contrary in
corporeal causes, things without parts subsist divisibly, and such as
are void of magnitude with the extension of magnitude. Hence, the
circle resident in cogitation, is one, simple and free from interval:
and magnitude itself is there destitute of magnitude; and figure
expressed by no figure: for such are reasons separate from matter.
But the circle subsisting in the phantasy, is divisible, figured, endued
with interval, not one only, but one and many, nor form alone, but
distributed with form. And the circle, in sensible objects, is
composite, distant with magnitude, diminished by a certain reason,
full of ineptitude, and very remote from the purity of immaterial
natures. We must therefore say, that geometry, when it asserts any
thing of circle and diameter, and of the passions and affections
which regard the circle; as of contacts, divisions, and the like:
neither teaches nor discourses concerning sensible forms, (since it
endeavours to separate us from these), nor yet concerning the form
resident in cogitation, (for here the circle is one, but geometry
discourses of many, proposing something of each, and
contemplating the same of all: and here it is indivisible, but the
geometric circle is divisible); but we must confess, that it considers
universal itself; yet as distributed in imaginative circles. And that it
beholds, indeed, one circle[98]: and by the medium of another,
contemplates the circle resident in the depths of cogitation: but by
another, different from the preceding, fabricates the fair variety of its
demonstrations. For since cogitation is endued with reasons, but
cannot behold them contractedly, separated from material figure; it
distributes and removes them, and draws them forth seated in the
shadowy bosom of the phantasy, and placed in the vestibules of
primary forms; revolving in it, or together with it, the knowledge of
these: loving, indeed, a separation from sensibles, but finding
imaginative matter proper for the reception of its universal forms.
Hence, its intellection does not subsist without the phantasy. And the
compositions and divisions of figures are imaginative; and their
knowledge is the way which leads us to that essence pursued by
cogitation: but cogitation itself, does not yet arrive at this stable
essence, while it looks abroad to externals, contemplates its internal
forms according to these, uses the impressions of reasons, and is
moved from itself to external and material forms. But if it should
ever be able to return to itself, when it has contracted intervals and
impressions, and beholds multitude without impression, and
subsisting uniformly; then it will excellently perceive geometrical
reasons, void of division and interval, essential and vital, of which
there is a copious variety. And this energy will be the best end of the
geometric study; and truly the employment of a Mercurial gift,
bringing it back as from a certain Calypso, and her detaining charms,
to a more intellectual knowledge; and freeing it from those forming
apprehensions with which the mirror of the phantasy is replete.
Indeed, it is requisite that a true geometrician should be employed
in this meditation, and should establish, as his proper end, the
excitation and transition from the phantasy to cogitation alone; and
that he should accomplish this by separating himself from intervals,
and the passive intellect to that energy which cogitation contains.
For by this means he will perceive all things without an interval, the
circle and diameter without a part, the polygons in the circle, all in
all, and yet every one separate and apart. Since, on this account, we
exhibit also in the phantasy, both circles inscribed in polygons, and
polygons in circles; imitating the alternate exhibition of reasons
destitute of parts. Hence, therefore, we describe the constitutions,
the origin, divisions, positions, and applications of figures: because
we use the phantasy, and distances of this kind proceeding from its
material nature; since form itself is immoveable, without generation,
indivisible, and free from every subject. But whatever form contains
occultly, and in an indistant manner, is produced into the phantasy
subsisting with intervals, divisibly and expanded. And that which,
indeed, produces the forms of geometric speculation, is cogitation:
but that from which they are produced, is the form resident in
cogitation: and that in which the produced figure resides is what is
called the passive intellect. Which folds itself about the impartibility
of true intellect, separates from itself the power of pure intelligence
free from interval; conforms itself according to all formless species,
and becomes perfectly every thing from which cogitation itself, and
our indivisible reason consists. And thus much concerning the
geometric matter, as we are not ignorant of whatever Porphyry the
Philosopher has observed in his miscellanies, and whatever many of
the Platonists describe. But we think that the present discussions are
more agreeable to geometric dissertations, and to Plato himself, who
subjects to geometry the objects of cogitation. For these mutually
agree among themselves; because the causes, indeed, of
geometrical forms, by which cogitation produces demonstrations,
pre-exist in demonstration itself: but the particular figures which are
divided and compounded, are situated in the receptacle of the
phantasy.
 C H A P. II.
What kind of Science Geometry is.

B ut let us now speak of that science which possesses a power of

contemplating the universal forms participated by imaginative
matter. Geometry, therefore, is endued with the knowledge of
magnitudes and figures, and of the terms and reasons subsisting in
these; together with the passions, various positions and motions
which are contingent about these. For it proceeds, indeed, from an
impartible point, but descends even to solids, and finds out their
multiform diversities. And again, runs back from things more
composite, to things more simple, and to the principles of these:
since it uses compositions and resolutions, always beginning from
suppositions, and assuming its principles from a previous science;
but employing all the dialectic ways. In principles, by the divisions of
forms from their genera, and by defining its orations. But in things
posterior to principles, by demonstrations and resolutions. As
likewise, it exhibits things more various, proceeding from such as are
more simple, and returning to them again. Besides this, it separately
discourses of its subjects; separately of its axioms; from which it
rises to demonstrations; and separately of essential accidents, which
it shews likewise are resident in its subjects. For every science has,
indeed, a genus, about which it is conversant, and whose passions it
proposes to consider: and besides this, principles, which it uses in
demonstrations; and essential accidents. Axioms, indeed, are
common to all sciences (though each employs them in its peculiar
subject matter), but genus and essential accident vary according to
the sciential variety. The subjects of geometry are therefore, indeed,
triangles, quadrangles, circles, and universally figures and
magnitudes, and the boundaries of these. But its essential accidents
are divisions, ratios, contacts, equalities, applications, excesses,
defects, and the like. But its petitions and axioms, by which it
demonstrates every particular are, this, to draw a right line from any
point to any point; and that, if from equals you take away equals,
the remainders will be equal; together with the petitions and axioms
consequent to these. Hence, not every problem nor thing sought is
geometrical, but such only as flow from geometric principles. And he
who is reproved and convicted from these, is convinced as a
geometrician. But whoever is convinced from principles different
from these, is not a geometrician, but is foreign from the geometric
contemplation. But the objects of the non-geometric investigation,
are of two kinds. For the thing sought for, is either from entirely
different principles, as we say that a musical enquiry is foreign from
geometry, because it emanates from other suppositions, and not
from the principles of geometry: or it is such as uses, indeed,
geometrical principles, but at the same time perversely, as if any one
should say, that parallels coincide. And on this account, geometry
also exhibits to us instruments of judging, by which we may know
what things are consequent to its principles, and what those are
which fall from the truth of its principles: for some things attend
geometrical, but others arithmetical principles. And why should we
speak of others, since they are far distant from these? For one
science is more certain than another (as Aristotle says[99]) that,
indeed, which emanates from more simple suppositions, than that
which uses more various principles; and that which tells the why,
than that which knows only the simple existence of a thing; and that
which is conversant about intelligibles, than that which touches and
is employed about sensibles. And according to these definitions of
certainty, arithmetic is, indeed, more certain than geometry, since its
principles excel by their simplicity. For unity is void of position, with
which a point is endued. And a point, indeed, when it receives
position, is the principle of geometry: but unity, of arithmetic. But
geometry is more certain than spherics; and arithmetic, than music.
For these render universally the causes of those theorems, which are
contained under them. Again, geometry is more certain than
mechanics, optics, and catoptrics. Because these discourse only on
sensible objects. The principles, therefore, of geometry and
arithmetic, differ, indeed, from the principles of other sciences; but
the hypotheses of these two, alternately differ and agree according
to the difference we have already described. Hence, also, with
respect to the theorems which are demonstrated in these sciences,
some are, indeed, common to them, but others peculiar. For the
theorem which says, every proportion may be expressed, alone
belongs to arithmetic; but by no means to geometry: since this last
science contains things which cannot be expressed[100]. That
theorem also, which affirms, that the gnomons of quadrangles are
terminated according to the least[101], is the property of arithmetic:
for in geometry, a minimum cannot be given. But those things are
peculiar to geometry, which are conversant about positions; for
numbers have no position: which respect contacts; for contact is
found in continued quantities: and which are conversant about
ineffable proportions; for where division proceeds to infinity, there
also that which is ineffable is found[102]. But things common to both
these sciences, are such as respect divisions, which Euclid treats of
in the second book; except that proposition which divides a right line
into extreme and mean proportion[103]. Again, of these common
theorems, some, indeed, are transferred from geometry into
arithmetic; but others, on the contrary, from arithmetic into
geometry: and others similarly accord with both, which are derived
into them from the whole mathematical science. For the
permutation, indeed, conversions, compositions, and divisions of
ratios are, after this manner, common to both. But such things as
are commensurable, arithmetic first beholds; but afterwards
geometry, imitating arithmetic. From whence, also, it determines
such things to be commensurables of this kind, which have the same
mutual ratio to one another, as number to number; because
commensurability principally subsists in numbers. For where number
is, there also that which is commensurable is found; and where
commensurable is, there also number. Lastly, geometry first inspects
triangles and quadrangles: but, arithmetic, receiving these from
geometry, considers them according to proportion. For in numbers,
figures reside in a causal manner. Being excited, therefore, from
effects, we pass to their causes, which are contained in numbers.
And at one time, we indifferently behold the same accidents, as
when every polygon is resolved by us into triangles[104]: but, at
another time, we are content with what is nearest to the truth, as
when we find in geometry one quadrangle the double of another, but
not finding this in numbers, we say that one square is double of
another, except by a deficience of unity. As for instance, the square
from 7, is double the square from 5, wanting one. But we have
produced our discussion to this length, for the purpose of evincing
the communion and difference in the principles of these two
sciences. Since it belongs to a geometrician to survey from what
common principles common theorems are divided; and from what
principles such as are peculiar proceed; and thus to distinguish
between the geometrical, and non-geometrical, referring each of
them to different sciences.
 C H A P. III.
From whence the whole of Geometry originated, how far it proceeds,
and in what its Utility consists.

B ut, beginning still higher, let us contemplate the whole of

geometry, from whence it originated, and how far it proceeds in
its energies: for thus we shall properly perceive the ornament which
it contains. Indeed, it is necessary to understand that it is extended
through the universality of things: that it accommodates its
animadversions[105] to all beings; and contains in itself the forms of
all things: that, according to its supreme part, and which is endued
with the highest power of intelligence, it surveys true beings; and
teaches by images the properties of divine ornaments, and the
powers of intellectual forms: for it contains the reasons of these also
in its peculiar contemplations. And it exhibits what figures are
convenient to the god, to primary essences, and to the natures of
souls. But, according to its middle cognitions, it evolves cogitative
reasons; explains and beholds the variety which they contain;
exhibits their existence, and inherent passions; as also, their
communities and diversities. From which, indeed, it comprehends, in
terminated bounds, the imaginative formations of figures, and
reduces them to the essential substance of reasons. But, according
to the third propagations of cogitative intelligence, it considers
nature, and delivers the manner in which the forms of sensible
elements, and the powers which they contain, are previously
received according to cause, in the reasons themselves. For it
possesses, indeed, the images of universal intelligible genera; but
the exemplars of such as are sensible: and completes its own
essence, according to such things as are subject to cogitation. And
through these, as through proper mediums, it ascends and descends
to those universals which truly are, and to sensible forms which are
in a state of perpetual formation. But always geometrically
philosophising concerning the things which are, it comprehends in all
the proportions of virtues, the images of intellectual, animal, and
natural concerns. And it delivers, in an orderly manner, all the
ornaments of republics: and exhibits in itself their various mutations.
Such then are its energies arising from a certain immaterial power of
cognition: but when it touches upon matter, it produces from itself a
multitude of sciences; such as geodæsia, mechanics, and
perspective: by which it procures the greatest benefit to the life of
mortals. For it constructs by these sciences, war-instruments, and
the bulwarks of cities; and makes known the circuits of mountains,
and the situations of places. Lastly, it instructs us in measures: at
one time of the diversified ways of the earth; and at another, of the
restless paths of the deep. Add too, that it constructs balances and
scales, by which it renders to cities a sure equality according to the
invariable standard of number. Likewise, it clearly expresses, by
images, the order of the whole orb of the earth; and by these,
manifests many things incredible to mankind, and renders them
credible to all. Such, indeed, as Hiero of Syracuse is reported to have
said of Archimedes[106], when he had fabricated a ship furnished
with three sails, which he had prepared to send to Ptolemy king of
Egypt. For when all the Syracusians together, were unable to draw
this ship, Archimedes enabled Hiero to draw it himself, without any
assistance from others. But he, being astonished, said, From this
day, Archimedes shall be believed in whatever he shall affirm. They
also report, that Gelo said the same, when Archimedes discovered
the weight of the several materials from which his crown was
composed, without dissolving their union. And such are the
narrations which many of the ancients have delivered to our
memory, who were willing to speak in praise of the mathematics:
and, on this account, we have placed before the reader, for the
present, a few out of the many, as not foreign from our design of
exhibiting the knowledge and utility of geometry.
 C H A P. IV.
On the Origin of Geometry, and its Inventors.

B ut let us now explain the origin of geometry, as existing in the

present age of the world. For the demoniacal Aristotle[107]
observes, that the same opinions often subsist among men,
according to certain orderly revolutions of the world: and that
sciences did not receive their first constitution in our times, nor in
those periods which are known to us from historical tradition, but
have appeared and vanished again in other revolutions of the
universe; nor is it possible to say how often this has happened in
past ages, and will again take place in the future circulations of time.
But, because the origin of arts and sciences is to be considered
according to the present revolution of the universe, we must affirm,
in conformity with the most general tradition, that geometry was
first invented by the Egyptians, deriving its origin from the
mensuration of their fields: since this, indeed, was necessary to
them, on account of the inundation of the Nile washing away the
boundaries of land belonging to each. Nor ought it to seem
wonderful that the invention of this as well as of other sciences,
should receive its commencement from convenience and
opportunity. Since whatever is carried in the circle of generation,
proceeds from the imperfect to the perfect. A transition, therefore, is
not undeservedly made from sense to consideration, and from this
to the nobler energies of intellect[108]. Hence, as the certain
knowledge of numbers received its origin among the Phœnicians, on
account of merchandise and commerce, so geometry was found out
among the Egyptians from the distribution of land. When Thales,
therefore, first went into Egypt, he transferred this knowledge from
thence into Greece: and he invented many things himself, and
communicated to his successors the principles of many. Some of
which were, indeed, more universal, but others extended to
sensibles. After him Ameristus, the brother of Stesichorus the poet,
is celebrated as one who touched upon, and tasted the study of
geometry, and who is mentioned by Hippias the Elean, as restoring
the glory of geometry. But after these, Pythagoras changed that
philosophy, which is conversant about geometry itself, into the form
of a liberal doctrine, considering its principles in a more exalted
manner; and investigating its theorems immaterially and
intellectually; who likewise invented a treatise of such things as
cannot be explained[109] in geometry, and discovered the
constitution of the mundane figures. After him, Anaxagoras the
Clazomenian succeeded, who undertook many things pertaining to
geometry. And Oenopides the Chian, was somewhat junior to
Anaxagoras, and whom Plato mentions in his Rivals, as one who
obtained mathematical glory. To these, succeeded Hippocrates, the
Chian, who invented the quadrature of the lunula[110], and
Theodorus the Cyrenean, both of them eminent in geometrical
knowledge. For the first of these, Hippocrates composed geometrical
elements: but Plato, who was posterior to these, caused as well
geometry itself, as the other mathematical disciplines, to receive a
remarkable addition, on account of the great study he bestowed in
their investigation. This he himself manifests, and his books, replete
with mathematical discourses, evince: to which we may add, that he
every where excites whatever in them is wonderful, and extends to
philosophy. But in his time also lived Leodamas the Thasian,
Archytas the Tarantine, and Theætetus the Athenian; by whom
theorems were increased, and advanced to a more skilful
constitution. But Neoclides was junior to Leodamas, and his disciple
was Leon; who added many things to those thought of by former
geometricians. So that Leon also constructed elements more
accurate, both on account of their multitude, and on account of the
use which they exhibit: and besides this, he discovered a method of
determining when a problem, whose investigation is sought for, is
possible, and when it is impossible. But Eudoxus the Cnidian, who
was somewhat junior to Leon, and the companion of Plato, first of all
rendered the multitude of those theorems which are called
universals more abundant; and to three proportions added three
others; and things relative to a section, which received their
commencement from Plato, he diffused into a richer multitude,
employing also resolutions in the prosecution of these. Again,
Amyclas the Heracleotean, one of Plato’s familiars, and Menæchmus,
the disciple, indeed, of Eudoxus, but conversant with Plato, and his
brother Dinostratus, rendered the whole of geometry as yet more
perfect. But Theudius, the Magnian, appears to have excelled, as
well in mathematical disciplines, as in the rest of philosophy. For he
constructed elements egregiously, and rendered many particulars
more universal. Besides, Cyzicinus the Athenian, flourished at the
same period, and became illustrious in other mathematical
disciplines, but especially in geometry. These, therefore, resorted by
turns to the Academy, and employed themselves in proposing
common questions. But Hermotimus, the Colophonian, rendered
more abundant what was formerly published by Eudoxus and
Theætetus, and invented a multitude of elements, and wrote
concerning some geometrical places. But Philippus the
Mendæan[111], a disciple of Plato, and by him inflamed in the
mathematical disciplines, both composed questions, according to the
institutions of Plato, and proposed as the object of his enquiry
whatever he thought conduced to the Platonic philosophy. And thus
far historians produce the perfection of this science. But Euclid was
not much junior to these, who collected elements, and constructed
many of those things which were invented by Eudoxus; and
perfected many which were discovered by Theætetus. Besides, he
reduced to invincible demonstrations, such things as were exhibited
by others with a weaker arm. But he lived in the times of the first
Ptolemy: for Archimedes mentions Euclid, in his first book, and also
in others. Besides, they relate that Euclid was asked by Ptolemy,
whether there was any shorter way to the attainment of geometry
than by his elementary institution, and that he answered, there was
no other royal path which led to geometry. Euclid, therefore, was
junior to the familiars of Plato, but more ancient than Eratosthenes
and Archimedes (for these lived at one and the same time, according
to the tradition of Eratosthenes) but he was of the Platonic sect, and
familiar with its philosophy: and from hence he appointed the
constitution of those figures which are called Platonic[112], as the
end of his elementary institutions.
 C H A P. V.
What Mathematical Volumes Euclid composed.

T here are, therefore, many other mathematical volumes of this

man, full of admirable diligence, and skilful consideration: for
such are his Optics[113], and Catoptrics: and such also, are his
elementary institutions, which conduce to the attainment of
music[114]; and his book concerning divisions[115]. But his
geometrical institution of the Elements is especially admirable, on
account of the order and election of those theorems and problems,
which are distributed through the Elements. For he does not assume
all which might be said, but that only which could be delivered in an
elementary order. Besides this, he exhibits modes of syllogisms of
every kind; some, indeed, receiving credibility from causes, but
others proceeding from certain signs; but all of them invincible and
sure, and accommodated to science. But, besides these, he employs
all the dialectic ways, dividing, indeed, in the inventions of forms;
but defining in essential reasons: and again, demonstrating in the
progressions from principles to things sought, but resolving in the
reversions from things sought to principles. Besides this, we may
view in his geometrical elements, the various species of conversions,
as well of such as are simple as of such as are more composite. And
again, what wholes may be converted with wholes: what wholes
with parts; and on the other hand, what as parts with parts[116].
Besides this, we must say, that in the continuation of inventions, the
dispositions and order of things preceding and following, and in the
power with which he treats every particular, he is not deceived, as if
falling from science, and carried to its contrary, falsehood and
ignorance. But because we may imagine many things as adhering to
truth, and which are consequent to principles producing science,
which nevertheless tend to that error which flows from the
principles, and which deceives ruder minds, he has also delivered
methods of the perspicacious prudence belonging to these. From the
possession of which, we may exercise those in the invention of
fallacies, who undertake this inspection, and may preserve ourselves
from all deception. And this book, by which he procures us this
preparation, is inscribed ψευδαρίος, or, concerning fallacies[117].
Because he enumerates in order their various modes, and in each
exercises our cogitation with various theorems. And he compares
truth with falsehood, and adapts the confutation of deception to
experience itself. This book, therefore, contains a purgative and
exercising power. But the institution of his elementary, skilful
contemplation of geometrical concerns, possesses an invincible and
perfect narration.
 C H A P. VI.
Concerning the Purport of Geometry.

B ut, perhaps, some one may enquire in what the design of this
treatise consists? To this I answer, that its design is to be
distinguished as well according to the objects of enquiry, as
according to the learner. And, indeed, regarding the subject, we
must affirm, that all the discourse of geometry is concerning the
mundane figures. Because it begins from such things as are simple,
but ends in the variety of their constitution. And, indeed, it
constitutes each of them separately, but at the same time delivers
their inscriptions in a sphere, and the proportions which they
contain. On which account some have thought, that the design of
each of the books is to be referred to the world; and they have
delivered to our memory, the utility which they afford us in the
contemplation of the universe. But distinguishing the design with
respect to the learner, we must affirm, that its purpose is the
institution of elements; and the perfection of the learners cogitative
powers in universal geometry. For beginning from these, we are
enabled to understand the other parts of this science, and to
comprehend the variety which they contain. And, indeed, without
these, the discipline of the rest, is to us impossible and
incomprehensible. For such theorems as are most principal and
simple, and are most allied to first suppositions, are here collected in
a becoming order. And the demonstrations of other mathematicians,
use these as most known, and advance from these in their most
complicated progressions. For thus Archimedes, in what he has writ
concerning the sphere and cylinder, and Apollonius, and the rest of
mathematicians, use, as evident principles, the things exhibited in
this treatise. Its purpose, therefore, is the institution of learners in
the whole geometric science, and to deliver the determinate
constitutions of the mundane figures.
 C H A P. VII.
From whence the Name of Elementary Institution originated, and
why Euclid is called the Institutor of Elements.

B ut what gave rise to the name of elementary institution, and of

element itself, from which elementary institution was derived? To
this we shall reply, by observing, that of theorems some are usually
called elements, but others elementary, and others again are
determined beyond the power of these. Hence, an element is that
whose consideration passes to the science of other things, and from
which we derive a solution of the doubts incident to the particular
science we investigate. For as there are certain first principles of
speech, most simple and indivisible, which we denominate elements,
and from which all discourse is composed; so there are certain
principal theorems of the whole of geometry, denominated elements,
which have the respect of principles to the following theorems;
which regard all the subsequent propositions, and afford the
demonstrations of many accidents essential to the subjects of
geometric speculation. But things elementary are such as extend
themselves to a multitude of propositions, and possess a certain
simplicity and sweetness, yet are not of the same dignity with
elements; because their contemplation is not common to all the
science to which they belong, as is the case in the following
theorem, that in triangles, perpendiculars, drawn from their angles
to their sides, coincide in one point[118]. Lastly, whatever neither
possesses a knowledge extended into multitude, nor exhibits any
thing skilful and elegant, falls beyond the elementary power. Again,
an element, as Menæchmus says, may have a twofold definition. For
that which confirms, is an element of that which is confirmed; as the
first proposition of Euclid with respect to the second, and the fourth
with regard to the fifth. And thus, indeed, many things may be
mutually called elements one of another; for they are mutually
confirmed. Thus, because the external angles of right-lined figures,
are equal to four right angles, the multitude of internal ones equal to
right angles; and, on the contrary, that from this is exhibited[119].
Besides, an element is otherwise called that into which, because it is
more simple, a composite is dissolved. But it must be observed, that
every element cannot be called the element of every thing: but such
as are more principal are the elements of such as are constituted in
the reason of the thing effected; as petitions are the elements of
theorems. And, according to this signification of an element, Euclid’s
elements are constructed. Some, indeed, of that geometry which is
conversant about planes; but others of stereometry. In the same
manner, likewise, in arithmetic and astronomy, many have composed
elementary institutions. But it is difficult, in each science, to chuse
and conveniently ordain elements, from which all the peculiarities of
that science originate, and into which they may be resolved. And
among those who have undertaken this employment, some have
been able to collect more, but others fewer elements. And some,
indeed, have used shorter demonstrations; but others have
extended their treatise to an infinite length. And some have omitted
the method by an impossibility; but others that by proportion; and
others, again, have attempted preparations against arguments
destroying principles. So that many methods of elementary
institution have been invented by particular writers on this subject.
But it is requisite that this treatise should entirely remove every
thing superfluous, because it is an impediment to science. But every
thing should be chosen, which contains and concludes the thing
proposed; for this is most convenient and useful in science. The
greatest care, likewise, should be paid to clearness and brevity; for
the contraries to these, disturb our cogitation. Lastly, it should
vindicate to itself, the universal comprehension of theorems, in their
proper bounds: for such things as divide learning into particular
fragments, produce an incomprehensible knowledge. But in all these
modes, any one may easily find, that the elementary institution of
Euclid excels the institutions of others. For its utility, indeed,
especially confers to the contemplation of primary figures: but the
transition from things more simple to such as are more various, and
also that perception, which from axioms possesses the beginning of
knowledge, produces clearness, and an orderly tradition: and the
migration from first and principal theorems to the objects of enquiry,
effects the universality of demonstration. For whatever he seems to
omit, may either be known by the same ways, as the construction of
a scalene and isosceles triangle[120]: or because they are difficult,
and capable of infinite variety, they are far remote from the election
of elements, such as the doctrine of perturbate proportions, which
Apollonius has copiously handled: or, lastly, because they may be
easily constructed from the things delivered, as from causes, such as
many species of angles and lines. For these, indeed, were omitted
by Euclid, and are largely discoursed of by others, and are known
from simple propositions. And thus much concerning the universal
elementary institution of geometry.
 C H A P. VIII.
Concerning the Order of Geometrical Discourses.

B ut let us now explain the universal order of the discourses

contained in geometry. Because then, we assert that this science
consists from hypothesis[121], and demonstrates its consequent
propositions from definite principles (for one science only, I mean
the first philosophy, is without supposition, but all the rest assume
their principles from this) it is necessary that he who constructs the
geometrical institution of elements, should separately deliver the
principles of the science, and separately the conclusions which flow
from those principles; and that he should render no reason
concerning the nature or truth of the principles, but should confirm
by reasons, the things consequent to these geometric principles. For
no science demonstrates its own principles, nor discourses
concerning them; but procures to itself a belief of their reality, and
they become more evident to the particular science to which they
belong than the things derived from them as their source. And
these, indeed, science knows by themselves; but their consequents,
through the medium of these. For thus, also, the natural philosopher
propagates his reasons from a definite principle, supposing the
existence of motion. Thus too, the physician, and he who is skilled in
any of the other sciences and arts. For if any one mingles principles,
and things flowing from principles into one and the same, he
disturbs the whole order of knowledge, and conglutinates things
which can never mutually agree; since a principle, and its emanating
consequent, are naturally distinct from each other. In the first place,
therefore (as I have said), principles in the geometric institution are
to be distinguished from their consequents, which is performed by
Euclid in each of his books; who, before every treatise, exhibits the
common principles of this science; and afterwards divides these
common principles into hypotheses, petitions, and axioms. For all
these mutually differ; nor is an axiom, petition, and hypothesis the
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com