xr interface designers

Abstract: The Reality-Virtuality (RV) continuum helps in describing the relationship between physical and computer-generated environments. However, the increasing number of Extended Reality (XR) paradigms introduces new technologies. Their characteristics cannot be completely represented by a single real-virtual dimension. It can be noted that XR systems not only vary in their proportion of real and virtual content but also adds, suppresses, or transforms information available to the user. This work proposes a framework for characterizing seven XR realities, namely Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), Mixed Reality (MR), Augmented Virtuality (AV), Phenomenal Reality (PR), Annexing Reality (AnR), and Diminished Reality (DR). It uses a two-dimensional extension of the conventional 1D RV continuum. The first dimension helps in identification of the position of an XR technology between real and virtual environments. The second dimension captures information addition and subtraction. The proposed approach gives a qualitative basis for comparing existing and emerging XR paradigms within a unified XR framework.

Abstract: Extended Reality (XR) headsets increasingly host familiar 2D user interfaces as windows floating in physical environments. However, their usability depends on environmental conditions that designers cannot fully control. Current design workflows often separate how a variant is designed from how it actually looks in the target environment. We present AdapTest, an in-situ authoring and testing tool that lets designers select interface elements, define when and how they change, compare the resulting variations, and test their activation without coding. Based on prior research and a formative study with 12 interface designers, the system targets three key environmental variables: distance, lighting, and occlusion. We evaluated AdapTest against a desktop design and in-headset preview workflow in a within-subjects study with 12 designers. Compared with the baseline, designers accounted for a wider range of environmental factors, addressed more overlapping conditions, and repeatedly tested and revised their designs in place; there were no significant differences in workload or usability despite longer sessions. Our work contributes an integrated, designer-centered approach to adapting, comparing, and validating environmentally responsive XR user interfaces.