Interactivity. Add enhanced interactivity (e.g., on-screen programming guides, menus, interactive voting systems, etc.), sharing capability, links to other community features, overlays, and squeeze-backs to Licensed Content consistent with then-prevailing industry custom and practice (it being understood that this clause (vii) shall apply only to edits made by Licensee, and that such edits made by MVPDs and other third parties shall be governed by Section 4.5);
Interactivity. In the event Grantee offers commercial interactive services on its Cable System and at such time as Subscribers subscribe to such interactive services, Grantee shall make available to the City equivalent interactive capabilities in accordance with Subsection 6.2(A). Any Subscriber equipment necessary to use interactive features on such Access Channels shall be made available to Subscribers on the same terms as for commercial uses. For purposes of this subsection, "interactive services" means two-way communication over the Cable System in which the Subscriber interacts with the program being viewed, but does not include merely ordering and receiving pay-per-view, video on demand, or other Cable Services.
Interactivity. In the event Grantee provides commercial interactive services on the Cable System and at such time as Subscribers subscribe to such interactive services, Grantee shall make available to the City equivalent interactive capabilities on its PEG Access Channels in accordance with subsection 6.2. Any Subscriber equipment necessary to use interactive features on such PEG Access Channels shall be made available to Subscribers on the same terms as for commercial uses. For purposes of this subsection, “interactive services” means two-way communication over the Cable System in which the Subscriber interacts with the program being viewed, but does not include use of a remote or secondary device (e.g. smartphone or tablet PC) for the purpose of calling up information of any kind, searching for and selecting programming, and/or merely ordering and receiving pay-per-view, video on demand, or other Cable Services.
Interactivity. Your inclusion of Stock Media Products within any such Creation is limited to uses where Stock Media Product is contained in an interactive experience for the user and not made available outside of the interactive experience. Such a permitted example of this use would be to include a 3D model of human anatomy in a medical training application, in a way that the 3D model or its environment may be manipulated or interacted with.
Interactivity. Your inclusion of Mesh Models within any such Creation is limited to uses where Mesh Mod- el Product is required to produce an interactive experience for the user. Such a permitted example of this use would be to include a 3D model of human anatomy in a medical training application, in a way that the 3D model may be manipulated or interacted with, and also where Imagery would not reasonably suffice for the intended use.
Interactivity. The trainee utilizes a TV, videodisc player, and remote control unit. The trainee can only do chapter searches and picture stop operations on the video disc. Typical costs for development of one hour of non-broadcast video quality courseware run between $20,000 and $40,000.
Interactivity. The videodisc player at this level comes with a built-in microprocessor with limited programability. The videodisc player can be programmed to perform simple playback sequences and respond to viewer choices during the program. Typical costs for developing one hour of level-2 courseware run between $50,000 and $100,000.
Interactivity. At this level the videodisc player is controlled by an external microcomputer, and the trainee is able to interactively control the videodisc presentation through the external microcomputer. The trainee intermixes analog data from the videodisc player and digital data displayed on the computer's monitor. The typical cost for one hour of level-3 courseware is between $100,000 and $200,000 with an average of $180,000 per hour. At level-3, a single hour of training material will translate into 4 to 6 hours of actual training time. This expansion comes about because of the interactivity between the videodisc contents and the lesson software on the computer. The software directs the student through the lesson by asking questions, giving examinations on the material, and branching off to new areas of information as required by the student's progress. The student is free to browse the video information while learning. EduSpace will permit easy creation of a level-3 program. Much of the cost of the level-3 program currently comes from the necessity of hiring or employing camera, sound, and edit crews for the production of the actual video footage. New software developments will allow EduSpace to integrate images from a variety of sources, including video footage shot directly by the instructional designer and product designs taken directly from an existing CAD database in digital form. These innovations will allow the instructional designer to skip the production crew cost, if desired, and realize enormous savings. EduSpace will also take training interactivity to a new level. The introduction of virtual reality will create a completely inclusive interactivity, something only simulators can do today. This new level is already being referred to as "level-4" by instructional technologists. The use of virtual reality will also reduce any required video time in the lesson as the VR environment will replace the video as a transmitter the information to be learned. In an article by X.X. Xxxxxxxx in "Multimedia Review" (taken from a study prepared for the Department of Defense), the following findings were noted on the use of level-3 interactive videodisc training: • The average amount of student time saved in the use of interactive videodisc training was 31%. • Interactive videodisc instruction was equally effective for both knowledge and performance outcomes increasing comprehension and performance for the average trainee by 28%. • Overall interactive videodisc instruc...
Interactivity i) Where appropriate, interactive content (discussions, forums, email communications) is encouraged. Online discussions and forums submissions must be screened for appropriateness before being posted.
Interactivity. The school library media center web sites were analyzed in terms of their level of user interactivity. Appendix F shows the data analyzed for the interactivity level. CRITERIA NUMBER OF SITES MEETING CRITERIA PERCENTAGE OF SITES MEETING CRITERIA Contact/Full Mailing Address 23 20.54% Contact/Email 59 52.68% Online Form(s) 2 1.79% Chat Forum 0 0.00% Table 5. Interactivity Criteria The criteria for interactivity and the percentage of web sites that met them are shown above in Table 5. None of the school library media center web sites analyzed had a chat forum. F Sig. No interactivity Contact full mail 1.704 .187 Contact email 12.222 .000 Online form .460 .632 Chat forum Interactivity level 11.367 .000 Table 6. ANOVA Values for Interactivity Criteria and Index ANOVA tests were performed to determine the significance of the overall interactivity index. The values are shown above in Table 6. The interactivity level was shown to be significant at < .005 as was contact information with an email address. The mean score was 1.313. Individual mean scores were .771 for unknown, 1.2 for non-media specialist web sites, and 1.946 for media specialist web sites. Authorship and interactivity level were analyzed with a Tukey HSD test to determine if there were significant differences between authorship pairs. For the criterion of contact with email, significance was shown between media specialist authored web sites and both unknown authored sites (<.005) and non-media specialist sites (.002). Significance was also shown for the overall interactivity level between media specialist authored web sites and both unknown authored sites, with a p value of less than .005, and non-media specialist sites, with a p value of .012. The correlation between interactivity level and authorship was positive with an R2 of .17. This means that 17% of the variance in the interactivity index is explained by authorship. Statistical tests performed for the interactivity level of the web sites show that the provision of an email address differs significantly by author type. The overall interactivity index also showed significance. The correlation between the index and authorship is positive with 17% of the variance explained. Design The hypothesis for the design criteria is that web sites designed by media specialist have a better design than those designed by non-media specialists as indicated by a higher mean score on the design scale. The design criteria analyzed and their corresponding respons...
