Talk:Multimodal interaction

(rename)

This article is being renamed to Multimodal Interaction to become the core article for a new sub-category of Human Computer Interaction. The term Multimodal Interaction is more inclusive than Multimodal Interfaces, and is the term adopted by several notable organizations including the W3C. Articles/catgeories under the new Multimodal category will include virtual, artificial and augmented reality. Thanks. -- Dx 20:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

the following reference concerns HRI:

Integration and design of multi-modal interfaces for supervisory control systems

Authors: Zaatri A.; Oussalah M.

Source: Information Fusion, Volume 4, Number 2, June 2003 , pp. 135-150(16)

Publisher: Elsevier — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.97.149.241 (talk) 23:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Citations Needed?

It is probably a good idea to add some citations when using statements like "most common" or when asserting what makes a well-designed or poorly-designed MMI. VUIvangelist (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this still the case in the present version of the article? If not, then should {{more footnotes needed}} be finally removed from it? ACaseOfWednesdays (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Move most of this material to "Modality (human-computer interaction)" or elsewhere?

The content of this article seems to be focused on exploring non-standard modalities (especially haptic & audio) for HCI, but it is not really talking about multimodal interaction -- what happens when multiple modalities are simultaneously present. Therefore, I think most of this article either belongs in Modality (human-computer interaction) or in the pages for the specific modalities, e.g. Auditory display or Haptic technology. Thoughts? Statisfactions (talk) 02:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually re-reading the article, I think I'm wrong, that most of this is in fact focused on multi-modality. Never mind. Statisfactions (talk) 22:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Possible AI generated text

OK this one is odd.

I tagged this article as AI-generated because a lot of the text displays clear indicators of LLM output, potentially lacking thorough review. The text originates in this diff, but that diff is excerpting something somewhere else, and I don't know who added it. Nevertheless, regardless of where it came from it still needs the usual review for hallucinations, sourcing, tone, etc. Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:50, 24 September 2025 (UTC)