GUI Design Validation via Translation Language
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing graphical user interface (GUI) design validation processes are inefficient and prone to errors due to the separation of design and implementation, making it difficult to accurately compare and correct differences between the two, especially when dealing with complex visual elements and dynamic content.
Innovation Solution
A system that translates design and implementation languages into a common validation language, allowing for pixel-precise comparison and identification of differences, enabling automated or manual correction of discrepancies, and providing visual aids like rulers for easy comparison.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If design and implementation are separated for independent work, then development efficiency is improved, but accuracy of matching design to implementation deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary validation system that includes a design validator and implementation validator. These validators act as mediators between the separated design and implementation processes, automatically comparing design specifications with implemented code to detect discrepancies. The intermediary validation mechanism maintains accuracy despite separation by providing automated feedback loops.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback mechanisms where validation results are automatically fed back to both design and implementation teams. The system generates validation reports that highlight differences between design and implementation, enabling continuous improvement and correction of mismatches while maintaining independent workflows.
2Device complexity
If direct comparison of design and implementation is performed, then validation is simple, but accuracy deteriorates due to different content (static vs dynamic)
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts and separates the comparison logic from the actual design and implementation content. The validation system extracts structural and functional characteristics from both design specifications and implemented code, then compares these extracted features rather than the raw content itself. This allows accurate comparison while handling different content types (static design vs dynamic implementation).
Solution Approach 2:
The patent transforms design and implementation data into comparable parameter formats. The validation system converts design specifications and implemented code into standardized parameter representations that can be systematically compared. This parameter transformation enables accurate validation while maintaining process simplicity.
3Ease of operation
If manual comparison of GUI elements is performed, then validation is straightforward, but time consumption increases due to large number of elements
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements self-service validation where the system automatically performs the comparison work without requiring manual intervention. The validation system autonomously analyzes design specifications, compares them with implemented code, generates validation reports, and identifies discrepancies. This automation maintains ease of operation while dramatically reducing time consumption.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual mechanical comparison processes with automated computational validation. Instead of manually examining each GUI element, the system uses automated validators that programmatically compare design and implementation. This substitution of mechanical manual processes with automated systems preserves simplicity while eliminating time-consuming manual work.
Data Source
AI summary
A selected location of a design view of a graphical user interface (GUI) generated using a design application may be received and used to identify a corresponding location for the selected location within an implementation view of the GUI. By mapping code of the GUI for the corresponding location to the selected location, using a validation language that relates the code to the design language, a difference between the selected location and the corresponding location may be identified. In this way, design validation may occur in a fast, automated, and reliable manner.