Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Discussion
Conclusions and Further Work
Future Work
Previous Work
Case Study
Conclusions
Case Study: Residential Care Home
Conceptual Background
Case of Study
Conclusion and Future Work
The Zoil Design Paradigm
Design Patterns for Post-Wimp Duis
Distributed User Interface Design
User Studies and Results
Results
Discussion and Conclusion
Trend on User Interfaces Design
Conclusion and Prospects
Introduction
Design of the Awareness System
Conclusion
User-Centered Design
Summary
Scenario and Requirements Analysis
Related Work
Conclusions and Future Work
References

Distributed user interfaces: State of the art

Profile image of Niklas ElmqvistNiklas Elmqvist

2011

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2271-5_1
visibility

…

description

207 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Human-Computer Interaction is a multidisciplinary fi eld focused on human aspects of the development of computer technology. As computer-based technology becomes increasingly pervasive -not just in developed countries, but worldwide -the need to take a human-centered approach in the design and development of this technology becomes ever more important. For roughly 30 years now, researchers and practitioners in computational and behavioral sciences have worked to identify theory and practice that infl uences the direction of these technologies, and this diverse work makes up the fi eld of human-computer interaction. Broadly speaking it includes the study of what technology might be able to do for people and how people might interact with the technology. In this series we present work which advances the science and technology of developing systems which are both effective and satisfying for people in a wide variety of contexts. The human-computer interaction series will focus on theoretical perspectives (such as formal approaches drawn from a variety of behavioral sciences), practical approaches (such as the techniques for effectively integrating user needs in system development), and social issues (such as the determinants of utility, usability and acceptability).

Figures (65)
The domain is distributed across users, computing platforms, or environments. This case is relevant to the domain of Distributed Databases, where mechanisms have been defined for users to manage persistent data using different platforms (that include perhaps different database management systems) that span over different physical locations (e.g., for security, optimization, replication, continuous work). When a task and/or a domain are distributed across different users, platforms, environments, the UI of the resulting computer-based system becomes a DUI. This DUI could be studied at different levels of abstraction ranging from the abstract to concrete to final. This therefore induces many potentially different configurations in which the distribution may occur. | en ke, hs ee ec Co nn ee Ce 2 Cec i.e
The domain is distributed across users, computing platforms, or environments. This case is relevant to the domain of Distributed Databases, where mechanisms have been defined for users to manage persistent data using different platforms (that include perhaps different database management systems) that span over different physical locations (e.g., for security, optimization, replication, continuous work). When a task and/or a domain are distributed across different users, platforms, environments, the UI of the resulting computer-based system becomes a DUI. This DUI could be studied at different levels of abstraction ranging from the abstract to concrete to final. This therefore induces many potentially different configurations in which the distribution may occur. | en ke, hs ee ec Co nn ee Ce 2 Cec i.e
listribution is operated. In order to address this issue, we now provide a catalogue f distribution primitives that will operate on CUI models of the cluster. We first lefine these distribution primitives in natural language, then in an Extended Backus- Naur Form (EBNF) format. In this notation, brackets indicate an optional section, vhile parentheses denote a simple choice in a set of possible values. In the follow- ng definitions, we use only one widget at a time for facilitating understanding. n the EBNF, we will use the four selector mechanism standard from W3C for CSS or generalization to all widgets. Fig. 3.1 Command line interface provided by the toolkit
listribution is operated. In order to address this issue, we now provide a catalogue f distribution primitives that will operate on CUI models of the cluster. We first lefine these distribution primitives in natural language, then in an Extended Backus- Naur Form (EBNF) format. In this notation, brackets indicate an optional section, vhile parentheses denote a simple choice in a set of possible values. In the follow- ng definitions, we use only one widget at a time for facilitating understanding. n the EBNF, we will use the four selector mechanism standard from W3C for CSS or generalization to all widgets. Fig. 3.1 Command line interface provided by the toolkit
Fig. 3.3. EBNF grammar for distribution primitives (excerpt) ““&? means that something can be repeated any number of times, and “+” means that something can appear one or more times. EBNF has been selected because it is widely used to formally define programming languages and markup languages (e.g. XML and SGML), the syntax of the language is precisely defined, thus leaving nc ambiguity on its interpretation, and it is easier to develop a parser for such < language, because the parser can be generated automatically with a compiler (e.g. YACC). Instances of distribution primitives are called by statements. The definition: of an operation, a source, a target, a selector and some other ones are defined ir Figs. 3.3 and 3.4 (excerpt only). The definitions could be extended later to suppor more operations or features.
Fig. 3.3. EBNF grammar for distribution primitives (excerpt) ““&? means that something can be repeated any number of times, and “+” means that something can appear one or more times. EBNF has been selected because it is widely used to formally define programming languages and markup languages (e.g. XML and SGML), the syntax of the language is precisely defined, thus leaving nc ambiguity on its interpretation, and it is easier to develop a parser for such < language, because the parser can be generated automatically with a compiler (e.g. YACC). Instances of distribution primitives are called by statements. The definition: of an operation, a source, a target, a selector and some other ones are defined ir Figs. 3.3 and 3.4 (excerpt only). The definitions could be extended later to suppor more operations or features.
Fig. 4.4 The updated CARE attributes References
Fig. 4.4 The updated CARE attributes References
The main task for the target application is the ability to plan and execute flight route plans. The main gui components of the application are: Map tool, flight planner, video player, land tool and a report tool, in Fig.5.1 you can see the entire application running on a single device. As a new device is connected the application either then adapt itself by place components on the new device, either through Atomic, Mirrored or Cloned representation or operators can manually transport components between devices. Figure 5.2 shows the application distributed over two devices and one component is mirrored on both devices wheres one component is moved to the new devices.
The main task for the target application is the ability to plan and execute flight route plans. The main gui components of the application are: Map tool, flight planner, video player, land tool and a report tool, in Fig.5.1 you can see the entire application running on a single device. As a new device is connected the application either then adapt itself by place components on the new device, either through Atomic, Mirrored or Cloned representation or operators can manually transport components between devices. Figure 5.2 shows the application distributed over two devices and one component is mirrored on both devices wheres one component is moved to the new devices.
Fig. 5.2. The application distributed over two devices, where the map tool is mirrored on both devices where as the flight planner is transferred atomically to the second device The boolean argument indicates if Component representation should be used, if false a Image representation will be used. The framework provides means for the developer to control the callback functionality tied to ui-components. Using the standard Listeners provided with Java will allow for Client call-back coupling, where the code is transferred with the component, whereas using the Listeners supplied with the Marve framework will enable Server call-back coupling. The Listeners in the Marve framework extends the Listeners in the Java toolkit and have Server attached to the name.
Fig. 5.2. The application distributed over two devices, where the map tool is mirrored on both devices where as the flight planner is transferred atomically to the second device The boolean argument indicates if Component representation should be used, if false a Image representation will be used. The framework provides means for the developer to control the callback functionality tied to ui-components. Using the standard Listeners provided with Java will allow for Client call-back coupling, where the code is transferred with the component, whereas using the Listeners supplied with the Marve framework will enable Server call-back coupling. The Listeners in the Marve framework extends the Listeners in the Java toolkit and have Server attached to the name.
Fig. 6.1 Overview of the adaptation process in collaborative scenarios under the DVP subsequent adaptauion are considerably enriched and resulting interlaces provide the benefits from plasticity and awareness jointly. Next, in this section, the process to be carried out to provide awareness during execution, without neglecting plasticity is presented. Then, the system architecture operating in the server is described. The first step to put in practice this approach is embedding a specific Implicit Plasticity Engine (IPE henceforth) on a given DUI on the client side. IPE is a runtime adaptive engine to provide runtime adaptations, and specific awareness mechanisms focused on promoting collaboration that enrich the default operative in the client side. Details on the software structure for the IPE, specially detailed for components aimed at supporting work in group can be consulted in [11]. However, we would like to mention the most important component of these kinds of compo- nents, the so-called particular group-awareness —pGA in Fig. 6.1, which represents the individual perceptions and particular understanding about the group from each working group member. It includes all the information generated during the perfor- mance of the combined tasks that could affect to whole group state. Additionally, it registers interactions of the user at hand with the other group members and also any data related to communication events and coordination actions.
Fig. 6.1 Overview of the adaptation process in collaborative scenarios under the DVP subsequent adaptauion are considerably enriched and resulting interlaces provide the benefits from plasticity and awareness jointly. Next, in this section, the process to be carried out to provide awareness during execution, without neglecting plasticity is presented. Then, the system architecture operating in the server is described. The first step to put in practice this approach is embedding a specific Implicit Plasticity Engine (IPE henceforth) on a given DUI on the client side. IPE is a runtime adaptive engine to provide runtime adaptations, and specific awareness mechanisms focused on promoting collaboration that enrich the default operative in the client side. Details on the software structure for the IPE, specially detailed for components aimed at supporting work in group can be consulted in [11]. However, we would like to mention the most important component of these kinds of compo- nents, the so-called particular group-awareness —pGA in Fig. 6.1, which represents the individual perceptions and particular understanding about the group from each working group member. It includes all the information generated during the perfor- mance of the combined tasks that could affect to whole group state. Additionally, it registers interactions of the user at hand with the other group members and also any data related to communication events and coordination actions.
performed in the same or different places and finally, the task can be synchronous or asynchronous. The original CD has been modified including awareness in the group task definition. The main reason is that awareness is obtaining a remarkable importance in the studied environments. The new version allows indicating that a task needs awareness (Request Awareness, RAw) or provides awareness (Provide Awareness, PAw).
performed in the same or different places and finally, the task can be synchronous or asynchronous. The original CD has been modified including awareness in the group task definition. The main reason is that awareness is obtaining a remarkable importance in the studied environments. The new version allows indicating that a task needs awareness (Request Awareness, RAw) or provides awareness (Provide Awareness, PAw).
Fig. 8.1 A distributed multi-display environment (dMDE) is a multi-display environment (MDE) distributed at the scale of a building, e.g., a hospital
Fig. 8.1 A distributed multi-display environment (dMDE) is a multi-display environment (MDE) distributed at the scale of a building, e.g., a hospital
Fig. 8.2 In the activity view, activities are represented by floating panels including graphic and text description. Related actions are represented by icons on that panel
Fig. 8.2 In the activity view, activities are represented by floating panels including graphic and text description. Related actions are represented by icons on that panel
Fig. 8.3. On the eft, Action view presents the resources in panels encapsulating different type of interactive remote content, e.g., web pages, tables or graphs, etc. On the right, Action view collaborative windows include list of participants, chat window and video-conference window
Fig. 8.3. On the eft, Action view presents the resources in panels encapsulating different type of interactive remote content, e.g., web pages, tables or graphs, etc. On the right, Action view collaborative windows include list of participants, chat window and video-conference window
Fig. 9.1 General view of MPrinceTool
Fig. 9.1 General view of MPrinceTool
Fig. 9.2 Functionality of MPrinceTool system
Fig. 9.2 Functionality of MPrinceTool system
between the students is usually done by through a vocal dialogue, but the teacher can apply also the use of other non-oral forms of dialogue, such as a chat. Once the student/s makes the choice; the teacher has the feedback from the system to discover if the selected answer of the student/s is correct or not. a -s
between the students is usually done by through a vocal dialogue, but the teacher can apply also the use of other non-oral forms of dialogue, such as a chat. Once the student/s makes the choice; the teacher has the feedback from the system to discover if the selected answer of the student/s is correct or not. a -s
As future work we aim to develop new methods and learning techniques that can encompass a greater number of goals in a collaborative task and that the user is responsible for scheduling, in our case the teacher, the task he chooses and how these objectives will be evaluated. And also propose a new form of assessment indi- cators to be chosen by the teacher.
As future work we aim to develop new methods and learning techniques that can encompass a greater number of goals in a collaborative task and that the user is responsible for scheduling, in our case the teacher, the task he chooses and how these objectives will be evaluated. And also propose a new form of assessment indi- cators to be chosen by the teacher.
Fig. 10.1 A ZOIL-based multi-user, multi-surface, and multi-device interactive space (left). The right section shows the architecture and user interface of a ZOIL client application in detail
Fig. 10.1 A ZOIL-based multi-user, multi-surface, and multi-device interactive space (left). The right section shows the architecture and user interface of a ZOIL client application in detail
Fig. 10.2, Overview of ZOIL’s distribution capabilities overall network load of a ZOIL setup is relatively small, since only small changes of the data model are transmitted (Fig. 10.2). To achieve this, the ZOIL software frame- work uses the object database db4o [4] with its Transparent Persistence (TP) mecha- nism. The aim of TP is to enable programmers to access or change persistent data in their application with the same ease as non-persistent data models in main memory. This means that with TP and db4o, ZOIL developers are not concerned with persis- tence at all since persistence simply becomes a natural property of all ZOIL objects. Using TP, programmers can simply change the states and locations of objects on the client-side using standard C# code. Invisible to the programmer, all changes are then observed by db4o’s TP implementation. It collects all changes and transmits them via TCP/IP to the database server in regular intervals (typically 100 ms). The server per- sists the new state of the landscape and informs all other clients about the changes which are then automatically retrieved and executed on the remote clients within 100- 300 ms (in typical setups). Thereby the use of the object database db4o instead of traditional Object-Relational Mapping libraries (e.g. Hibernate) also facilitates itera- tive design, since changes in the objects’ class definitions in C# are directly recog- nized by db4o0 without the need to update external XML mappings.
Fig. 10.2, Overview of ZOIL’s distribution capabilities overall network load of a ZOIL setup is relatively small, since only small changes of the data model are transmitted (Fig. 10.2). To achieve this, the ZOIL software frame- work uses the object database db4o [4] with its Transparent Persistence (TP) mecha- nism. The aim of TP is to enable programmers to access or change persistent data in their application with the same ease as non-persistent data models in main memory. This means that with TP and db4o, ZOIL developers are not concerned with persis- tence at all since persistence simply becomes a natural property of all ZOIL objects. Using TP, programmers can simply change the states and locations of objects on the client-side using standard C# code. Invisible to the programmer, all changes are then observed by db4o’s TP implementation. It collects all changes and transmits them via TCP/IP to the database server in regular intervals (typically 100 ms). The server per- sists the new state of the landscape and informs all other clients about the changes which are then automatically retrieved and executed on the remote clients within 100- 300 ms (in typical setups). Thereby the use of the object database db4o instead of traditional Object-Relational Mapping libraries (e.g. Hibernate) also facilitates itera- tive design, since changes in the objects’ class definitions in C# are directly recog- nized by db4o0 without the need to update external XML mappings.
Code Sample 10.2, XAML for making ZPhoto a draggable, resizable, and rotatable zoom target
Code Sample 10.2, XAML for making ZPhoto a draggable, resizable, and rotatable zoom target
ind devices act as one distributed UI for co-located collaboration (Fig. 11.1). In thes« spaces we try to achieve a “natural” interaction, i.e. the UI is perceived as somethin: inobtrusive or even invisible that does not require the users’ continuous attention or « zreat deal of cognitive resources. A well-proven approach to achieve this is the visua nodel-world interface for “direct manipulation’, in which a tight coupling of input anc yutput languages narrows the gulfs of execution and evaluation [6]. While direc nanipulation originates from 1980s desktop computing, its principles are also the oundation of novel post-WIMP (post-“Windows Icons Menu Pointing’) or reality yased UIs [7]: Their interaction styles (e.g. tangible, multi-touch or paper-based UIs ‘draw strength by building on users’ pre-existing knowledge of the everyday, non ligital world to a much greater extent than before.” Users can apply the full breadth o heir natural, non-digital skills, e.g. the bimanual manipulation of objects, handwritins yr their awareness of objects or persons in their physical and social environment. Our two research groups have designed and implemented a great variety of suct
ind devices act as one distributed UI for co-located collaboration (Fig. 11.1). In thes« spaces we try to achieve a “natural” interaction, i.e. the UI is perceived as somethin: inobtrusive or even invisible that does not require the users’ continuous attention or « zreat deal of cognitive resources. A well-proven approach to achieve this is the visua nodel-world interface for “direct manipulation’, in which a tight coupling of input anc yutput languages narrows the gulfs of execution and evaluation [6]. While direc nanipulation originates from 1980s desktop computing, its principles are also the oundation of novel post-WIMP (post-“Windows Icons Menu Pointing’) or reality yased UIs [7]: Their interaction styles (e.g. tangible, multi-touch or paper-based UIs ‘draw strength by building on users’ pre-existing knowledge of the everyday, non ligital world to a much greater extent than before.” Users can apply the full breadth o heir natural, non-digital skills, e.g. the bimanual manipulation of objects, handwritins yr their awareness of objects or persons in their physical and social environment. Our two research groups have designed and implemented a great variety of suct
patterns and still requires much know-how about the technical background. For example, a DUI developer needs to know how to distribute the UI onto other machines. But network synchronization with all its issues is a very complex topic and a UI developer should not need to worry much about it. and a UI developer should not need to worry much about it. The concept of a Distributed ViewModel tries to address those problems by providing a network-synchronized model of a view to ease development of a shared UI. It provides an additional abstraction layer that contains the content of a view as well as view-dependent properties. The distributed view model is based on the Model-View-View-Model (MVVM) design pattern [15]. In the MVVM pattern the data model of an application is separated from its view, similar to the Model- View-Controller (MVC) pattern. In contrast to MVC, MVVM provides an addi- tional abstraction layer, the so-called “ViewModel” which is an abstract description of the view. The “ViewModel” can also be seen as a “Model of the View” containing only view-related information and logic. This allows an UI designer to mainly focus on UI design and it provides a clean interface to the non-UI parts of the application. The Distributed ViewModel pattern, as depicted in Fig. 11.2, facilitates this clean interface to provide a transparent distribution of view-related properties which are defined in the ViewModel. The Distributed ViewModel is much like the ViewModel as it contains the same information, but in contrast its contents and structure are already prepared for network synchronization. All information stored in a Distributed ViewModel is automatically serialized and synchronized with all other connected instances of the application or UI. In practice, the ViewModel can often be completely replaced by a Distributed ViewModel, if data types used in the view are compatible with network synchronization.
patterns and still requires much know-how about the technical background. For example, a DUI developer needs to know how to distribute the UI onto other machines. But network synchronization with all its issues is a very complex topic and a UI developer should not need to worry much about it. and a UI developer should not need to worry much about it. The concept of a Distributed ViewModel tries to address those problems by providing a network-synchronized model of a view to ease development of a shared UI. It provides an additional abstraction layer that contains the content of a view as well as view-dependent properties. The distributed view model is based on the Model-View-View-Model (MVVM) design pattern [15]. In the MVVM pattern the data model of an application is separated from its view, similar to the Model- View-Controller (MVC) pattern. In contrast to MVC, MVVM provides an addi- tional abstraction layer, the so-called “ViewModel” which is an abstract description of the view. The “ViewModel” can also be seen as a “Model of the View” containing only view-related information and logic. This allows an UI designer to mainly focus on UI design and it provides a clean interface to the non-UI parts of the application. The Distributed ViewModel pattern, as depicted in Fig. 11.2, facilitates this clean interface to provide a transparent distribution of view-related properties which are defined in the ViewModel. The Distributed ViewModel is much like the ViewModel as it contains the same information, but in contrast its contents and structure are already prepared for network synchronization. All information stored in a Distributed ViewModel is automatically serialized and synchronized with all other connected instances of the application or UI. In practice, the ViewModel can often be completely replaced by a Distributed ViewModel, if data types used in the view are compatible with network synchronization.
Fig. 12.1 Placement complexity of paired text and button widgets across a large display (LD) and small device (SD) This model allows us to separately explore the input and the output of a (distributed 1ser interface and how users respond to it during the execution and evaluation stages According to Norman, different mental activities are associated with the input anc yutput and so widgets allowing users to enter input might exhibit different design con traints compared to output widgets. Hence, we denote widgets associated with systen nput as interactive-widgets and those associated with system output as non-interactiv vidgets. Non-interactive widgets are in general used to present system states to users towever, interactive widgets accept user input to initiate system state changes. There is considerable complexity concernins the placement of non-interactiv
Fig. 12.1 Placement complexity of paired text and button widgets across a large display (LD) and small device (SD) This model allows us to separately explore the input and the output of a (distributed 1ser interface and how users respond to it during the execution and evaluation stages According to Norman, different mental activities are associated with the input anc yutput and so widgets allowing users to enter input might exhibit different design con traints compared to output widgets. Hence, we denote widgets associated with systen nput as interactive-widgets and those associated with system output as non-interactiv vidgets. Non-interactive widgets are in general used to present system states to users towever, interactive widgets accept user input to initiate system state changes. There is considerable complexity concernins the placement of non-interactiv
to enter their input. Considering multi-step interactions that involve more than one interactive widget, we can come up with four basic design strategies: (1) LD mode: With this design strategy, users use their smart phone to directly interact with widgets placed on the large public display. Although simple, in a multi-user scenario; problems can arise where more than one user want to access the same interactive widget. Furthermore, a sequence of actions might require a user to interact with several widgets over a longer time period which demands for space or ‘real estate’ on the LD; (11) SD mode: Moving interactive widgets down to the SD will free up real estate on the LD. Placing the interactive widgets on the display of a smart phone will also help ameliorate the multi- user access problem. Conversely this approach has the added complexity of using both the primary LD and the secondary SD where the smaller display imposes limita- tions in widgets placement compared to available real estate on the LD. (iii) LD-SD mode: Here some interactive widgets are placed on the LD and some on the SD. For example, a menu bar widget placed on the LD with associated menu widgets placed on the SD when activated by the users on the LD. The advantage here is that every user interaction has a defined entry point, which is in this case the LD. On the other hand, an interactive widget arrangement that is partly across LD and SD may cause user confusion; Mirrored mode: This design strategy introduces redundancy into the distributed user interface by placing the same widgets on both LD and SD. Hence, the audience can clearly see what the user enters. Of course, we neither solve real estate nor multi-user access problems, but users can make their own choice of select- ing the display they want to interact with, without the risk of getting confused.
to enter their input. Considering multi-step interactions that involve more than one interactive widget, we can come up with four basic design strategies: (1) LD mode: With this design strategy, users use their smart phone to directly interact with widgets placed on the large public display. Although simple, in a multi-user scenario; problems can arise where more than one user want to access the same interactive widget. Furthermore, a sequence of actions might require a user to interact with several widgets over a longer time period which demands for space or ‘real estate’ on the LD; (11) SD mode: Moving interactive widgets down to the SD will free up real estate on the LD. Placing the interactive widgets on the display of a smart phone will also help ameliorate the multi- user access problem. Conversely this approach has the added complexity of using both the primary LD and the secondary SD where the smaller display imposes limita- tions in widgets placement compared to available real estate on the LD. (iii) LD-SD mode: Here some interactive widgets are placed on the LD and some on the SD. For example, a menu bar widget placed on the LD with associated menu widgets placed on the SD when activated by the users on the LD. The advantage here is that every user interaction has a defined entry point, which is in this case the LD. On the other hand, an interactive widget arrangement that is partly across LD and SD may cause user confusion; Mirrored mode: This design strategy introduces redundancy into the distributed user interface by placing the same widgets on both LD and SD. Hence, the audience can clearly see what the user enters. Of course, we neither solve real estate nor multi-user access problems, but users can make their own choice of select- ing the display they want to interact with, without the risk of getting confused.
present a new system state as a result of user interactions Fig. 12.3. Since non-interactive widgets are meant to present content while interactive wid- gets are mainly to receive user inputs, the placement decision a designer has to make in case of non-interactive content would be based on the gains and the loss in each design decision as described below: (i) LD mode: This is the classic design strategy used by the majority of today’s interactive large public display installations. From the design point of view the LD mode is a challenging task. A designer has to find the right balance between available real estate on the LD and the quantity and the quality of content presented on the LD to properly serve the audience; (11) SD mode: Forcing users to rely solely on a SD defeats the purpose of large public display installations, which are designed to be enjoyable for an entire audience. However, in some circumstances, e.g. content that requires privacy or security considerations, utilizing this mode may be useful for implementing certain aspects of a large dis- play application; (iii) LD-SD mode: This mode combines the advantages of LD and SD. Content that might be interesting to the entire audience can be presented using non-interactive widgets on the LD. On the other hand, content specific to a request- ing user, and of less interest and importance for the rest of the audience, can be placed on the SD; (iv) Mirrored Mode: In this mode the very same content is pre- sented through same non-interactive widgets placed on the LD and SD. Here users can make their own choice of which display they use to view content. As listed above, the overall design strategies for non-interactive widgets compared to interac- tive-widgets differ in the way they serve and apply to distributed user interface concepts/issues.
present a new system state as a result of user interactions Fig. 12.3. Since non-interactive widgets are meant to present content while interactive wid- gets are mainly to receive user inputs, the placement decision a designer has to make in case of non-interactive content would be based on the gains and the loss in each design decision as described below: (i) LD mode: This is the classic design strategy used by the majority of today’s interactive large public display installations. From the design point of view the LD mode is a challenging task. A designer has to find the right balance between available real estate on the LD and the quantity and the quality of content presented on the LD to properly serve the audience; (11) SD mode: Forcing users to rely solely on a SD defeats the purpose of large public display installations, which are designed to be enjoyable for an entire audience. However, in some circumstances, e.g. content that requires privacy or security considerations, utilizing this mode may be useful for implementing certain aspects of a large dis- play application; (iii) LD-SD mode: This mode combines the advantages of LD and SD. Content that might be interesting to the entire audience can be presented using non-interactive widgets on the LD. On the other hand, content specific to a request- ing user, and of less interest and importance for the rest of the audience, can be placed on the SD; (iv) Mirrored Mode: In this mode the very same content is pre- sented through same non-interactive widgets placed on the LD and SD. Here users can make their own choice of which display they use to view content. As listed above, the overall design strategies for non-interactive widgets compared to interac- tive-widgets differ in the way they serve and apply to distributed user interface concepts/issues.
Fig. 12.4 The polar defense game (/eft) and the interactive directory (right) For our user studies we developed three applications whose interfaces were capable of utilizing just the LD or distributing itself across both the LD and SD. Polar Defense is a game where users begin by placing six defense towers on a 9x9 grid. Once the towers have been placed, enemies begin to cross the grid. Depending on the strategic placement of the towers, a number of enemies will be prevented from crossing the field as the towers attack nearby enemies. Users score based on how many enemies they prevented from crossing the field. Figures 12.4 and 12.1-left shows the Polar Defense game. OO TT HY cs Di i ee ee kh ee ec el ee i ec kl Bes Eb cc Becca ;
Fig. 12.4 The polar defense game (/eft) and the interactive directory (right) For our user studies we developed three applications whose interfaces were capable of utilizing just the LD or distributing itself across both the LD and SD. Polar Defense is a game where users begin by placing six defense towers on a 9x9 grid. Once the towers have been placed, enemies begin to cross the grid. Depending on the strategic placement of the towers, a number of enemies will be prevented from crossing the field as the towers attack nearby enemies. Users score based on how many enemies they prevented from crossing the field. Figures 12.4 and 12.1-left shows the Polar Defense game. OO TT HY cs Di i ee ee kh ee ec el ee i ec kl Bes Eb cc Becca ;
Fig. 13.1 Design of a dynamic peephole interface for projector phones. Only a part of the information space is visible (in this figure the opaque part). Notifications on different parts of the information space are indicated using the Halo technique [1]
Fig. 13.1 Design of a dynamic peephole interface for projector phones. Only a part of the information space is visible (in this figure the opaque part). Notifications on different parts of the information space are indicated using the Halo technique [1]
Fig. 13.2 This image was created by blending two images of the prototype taken from the same viewpoint. The accuracy is very high even though a small can be seen in the blending which is due to position inaccuracy To explore the whole map the user simply changes the orientation of the device. By this, the application than reveals the whole map part by part using the peephole metaphor (compare Fig. 13.2). In line with a normal map application, the map can be enhanced with different layers containing Points of Interest (POD) like georefer- enced Wikipedia articles, Hotels or the Google Latitude position of friends. The user can explore the detailed content of the POIs by moving the crosshair on the projection over the points and click on the select button. The information
Fig. 13.2 This image was created by blending two images of the prototype taken from the same viewpoint. The accuracy is very high even though a small can be seen in the blending which is due to position inaccuracy To explore the whole map the user simply changes the orientation of the device. By this, the application than reveals the whole map part by part using the peephole metaphor (compare Fig. 13.2). In line with a normal map application, the map can be enhanced with different layers containing Points of Interest (POD) like georefer- enced Wikipedia articles, Hotels or the Google Latitude position of friends. The user can explore the detailed content of the POIs by moving the crosshair on the projection over the points and click on the select button. The information
Fig. 13.3. The prototype consists of an 4th generation iPod touch and a microvision showWX laser projector
Fig. 13.3. The prototype consists of an 4th generation iPod touch and a microvision showWX laser projector
Fig. 14.1 Shared workspace with multi-pointer system On a similar way, software applications are expected to be used on different platforms. Users look for user interfaces which are familiar, intuitive, and easy to use. Designers should develop for the user (user-center design) looking for increasing the user experience and the usability of the system.
Fig. 14.1 Shared workspace with multi-pointer system On a similar way, software applications are expected to be used on different platforms. Users look for user interfaces which are familiar, intuitive, and easy to use. Designers should develop for the user (user-center design) looking for increasing the user experience and the usability of the system.
Fig. 14.2 Distributed interfaces. Two different views 14.4 Implementing Distributed User Interfaces in Drag&Share
Fig. 14.2 Distributed interfaces. Two different views 14.4 Implementing Distributed User Interfaces in Drag&Share
WT UINIY ALY auy Va Sew Vil Ul ay Olelil. The client is the internet browser. It displays the page containing the shared workspace, and communicates with the web server and the websockets server. The system architecture allows multiple users to interact concurrently in the system, delete documents or use the chat system. The interface always shows a consistent view with the state of the system.
WT UINIY ALY auy Va Sew Vil Ul ay Olelil. The client is the internet browser. It displays the page containing the shared workspace, and communicates with the web server and the websockets server. The system architecture allows multiple users to interact concurrently in the system, delete documents or use the chat system. The interface always shows a consistent view with the state of the system.
Fig. 15.1 The TangiSense interactive table with the recognition and learning of colors application ee oe ae Interactive tables have existed for a few years now. They are similar to the touchscreen tablet, but larger, being more the size of a coffee table for example around | m square. These tables are mainly based on tactile or vision technology} and allow the same uses as the tablets; they thus handle mainly virtual objects. It this chapter, we propose another type of interactive table which uses Radic Frequency Identification (RFID) technology in order to interact, not only with the fingers on virtual objects but directly with tangible objects RFID tagged. Thi: table, called TangiSense, detects objects equipped with RFID tags when they are placed on it [3]. The use of RFID makes it possible firstly to detect objects presen on the surface of the table, secondly to identify them thanks to one or more tag:
Fig. 15.1 The TangiSense interactive table with the recognition and learning of colors application ee oe ae Interactive tables have existed for a few years now. They are similar to the touchscreen tablet, but larger, being more the size of a coffee table for example around | m square. These tables are mainly based on tactile or vision technology} and allow the same uses as the tablets; they thus handle mainly virtual objects. It this chapter, we propose another type of interactive table which uses Radic Frequency Identification (RFID) technology in order to interact, not only with the fingers on virtual objects but directly with tangible objects RFID tagged. Thi: table, called TangiSense, detects objects equipped with RFID tags when they are placed on it [3]. The use of RFID makes it possible firstly to detect objects presen on the surface of the table, secondly to identify them thanks to one or more tag:
Fig. 15.2 (a) Centralized distribution of UI (b) Network of distributed UI
Fig. 15.2 (a) Centralized distribution of UI (b) Network of distributed UI
Fig. 15.3. Problem space and positioning of four representative scenarios
Fig. 15.3. Problem space and positioning of four representative scenarios
Fig. 15.4 Sequence diagram illustrating the scenario 1 .2.2 Scenarios of Interaction Initiated by Tangible Objects on Tabletop
Fig. 15.4 Sequence diagram illustrating the scenario 1 .2.2 Scenarios of Interaction Initiated by Tangible Objects on Tabletop
Fig. 15.5 Sequence diagram to illustrate the scenario 2 (partial duplication of functionality on VP)
Fig. 15.5 Sequence diagram to illustrate the scenario 2 (partial duplication of functionality on VP)
3 Case Study: Crisis Management Unit
3 Case Study: Crisis Management Unit
Fig. 15.7 Crisis unit using TangiSense and other platforms
Fig. 15.7 Crisis unit using TangiSense and other platforms
Fig. 15.9 Sequence diagram to illustrate an example of exchange in the case study (Multiple collaboration) Fig. 15.8 Examples of DUI
Fig. 15.9 Sequence diagram to illustrate an example of exchange in the case study (Multiple collaboration) Fig. 15.8 Examples of DUI
Fig. 16.1 The collaborative mobile service creation editor architecture
Fig. 16.1 The collaborative mobile service creation editor architecture
Fig. 16.2 The shared and local views of the system functionality
Fig. 16.2 The shared and local views of the system functionality
Fig. 16.3. The sport tracker scenario
Fig. 16.3. The sport tracker scenario
Fig. 17.1 (a) Meeting room that incorporates the “Co-Interactive Table system”. (b) Natural gesture performed to execute a task by means of the interactive panel. This interaction style has been called “approach&remove” point to the server that stores the important data, files and methods ne-cessary for the operation of the system. In addition, the room has a projector con-nected to a PC that shows the users connected in each moment and the post-it notes that they have sent during the meeting through their panels. It can also sup-port remote meetings where users are distributed in different geographical loca-tions connected to the same server.
Fig. 17.1 (a) Meeting room that incorporates the “Co-Interactive Table system”. (b) Natural gesture performed to execute a task by means of the interactive panel. This interaction style has been called “approach&remove” point to the server that stores the important data, files and methods ne-cessary for the operation of the system. In addition, the room has a projector con-nected to a PC that shows the users connected in each moment and the post-it notes that they have sent during the meeting through their panels. It can also sup-port remote meetings where users are distributed in different geographical loca-tions connected to the same server.
Fig. 17.2 Interactive panel user interface showing the functions offered by the intelligent objects
Fig. 17.2 Interactive panel user interface showing the functions offered by the intelligent objects
Fig. 17.3. (a) Co-Interactive table implementation of distributed user interfaces. (b) The user in (/) has a presentation open in his/her mobile device. The user brings near the device to the metaphor called “Send to project’’. Instantly the projector shows the same presentation that the user has in his/ her mobile devices. In this way the interface mobile device is distributed in the projector (2)
Fig. 17.3. (a) Co-Interactive table implementation of distributed user interfaces. (b) The user in (/) has a presentation open in his/her mobile device. The user brings near the device to the metaphor called “Send to project’’. Instantly the projector shows the same presentation that the user has in his/ her mobile devices. In this way the interface mobile device is distributed in the projector (2)
The system is a client-server system (see Fig. 17.4). The client system runs on the user mobile device. It is connected to the server application through a wireless network and it is communicated with the interactive table via RFID. When the RFID reader in the mobile device is approached to the chosen metaphor, the RFID tag is excited by electromagnetic waves sent by the RFID reader, then, the component controller, explained below, sends the identifier to the server. The server maps this information in the database and executes the steps necessary to return the information to the mobile device. The applications running in the server are shown in the projector. In addition, the system includes a webcam to communicate via conference with other users and share files and information remotely.
The system is a client-server system (see Fig. 17.4). The client system runs on the user mobile device. It is connected to the server application through a wireless network and it is communicated with the interactive table via RFID. When the RFID reader in the mobile device is approached to the chosen metaphor, the RFID tag is excited by electromagnetic waves sent by the RFID reader, then, the component controller, explained below, sends the identifier to the server. The server maps this information in the database and executes the steps necessary to return the information to the mobile device. The applications running in the server are shown in the projector. In addition, the system includes a webcam to communicate via conference with other users and share files and information remotely.
Fig. 18.1 Distributed photo frames with light auras indicating high level changes in the elderly’s wellbeing, and intelligent photo frame jewelry to exchange affective messages, forming part of the Aurama awareness system
Fig. 18.1 Distributed photo frames with light auras indicating high level changes in the elderly’s wellbeing, and intelligent photo frame jewelry to exchange affective messages, forming part of the Aurama awareness system
Fig. 18.2 Overview of the Aurama awareness system with tailored distributed user interfaces for each party. The sensors in the elderly’s home capture contextual information to assess their wellbeing and inform family and care providers
Fig. 18.2 Overview of the Aurama awareness system with tailored distributed user interfaces for each party. The sensors in the elderly’s home capture contextual information to assess their wellbeing and inform family and care providers
have a contact with whom they have a caring and affective relation at a distant locatio. and also be familiar with voice over IP (VOIP) communication systems. Thus, the walk around performing some tasks while having a phone conversation. In this initia study, participants commented very positively on ambient telephony considering 1 more comfortable and convenient than cordless, especially regarding its hands-fre and location-free use. Some participants commented about feeling their contac closer, as if they were in the same room. Participants noticed the sound source (speakers on the ceiling) and in many cases showed intimacy behaviors (like noddin: and staring at the sound sources). On the other hand, there were negative remark about “talking to the ceiling”, the “unnatural” position of the sound, not havin: anything to look at, and the low quality of the sound. These could be annoying especially when multitasking. a a i: a a a a) a a,
have a contact with whom they have a caring and affective relation at a distant locatio. and also be familiar with voice over IP (VOIP) communication systems. Thus, the walk around performing some tasks while having a phone conversation. In this initia study, participants commented very positively on ambient telephony considering 1 more comfortable and convenient than cordless, especially regarding its hands-fre and location-free use. Some participants commented about feeling their contac closer, as if they were in the same room. Participants noticed the sound source (speakers on the ceiling) and in many cases showed intimacy behaviors (like noddin: and staring at the sound sources). On the other hand, there were negative remark about “talking to the ceiling”, the “unnatural” position of the sound, not havin: anything to look at, and the low quality of the sound. These could be annoying especially when multitasking. a a i: a a a a) a a,
Fig. 18.4 User test of the ambient telephony system: (/eft) a user laying back during the call and (right) a user addressing the rendering unit while performing a task
Fig. 18.4 User test of the ambient telephony system: (/eft) a user laying back during the call and (right) a user addressing the rendering unit while performing a task
Fig. 18.5 An example of the SoPresenT devices distributed remotely conveying presence and motion information of the remote party the user triggers the remote device to glow indicating the person is thinking about the remote party. By tapping the device the user requests information of the remote party regarding how active they have been around their device and this is shown via patterns of light. Furthermore, when one taps their device requesting information of the remote party, the remote party’s device can glow indicating that their informa- tion has been requested.
Fig. 18.5 An example of the SoPresenT devices distributed remotely conveying presence and motion information of the remote party the user triggers the remote device to glow indicating the person is thinking about the remote party. By tapping the device the user requests information of the remote party regarding how active they have been around their device and this is shown via patterns of light. Furthermore, when one taps their device requesting information of the remote party, the remote party’s device can glow indicating that their informa- tion has been requested.
Fig. 19.1 In this scenario, two visitors use their mobile devices to search for a restaurant or a hotel. Their productivity would benefit from knowledge of what the other person is looking at, for example, in the same shared virtual workspace. However, common interfaces for mobile devices lack such awareness cues
Fig. 19.1 In this scenario, two visitors use their mobile devices to search for a restaurant or a hotel. Their productivity would benefit from knowledge of what the other person is looking at, for example, in the same shared virtual workspace. However, common interfaces for mobile devices lack such awareness cues
Table 19.1 A summary of awareness features and their corresponding visual augmentation cues
Table 19.1 A summary of awareness features and their corresponding visual augmentation cues
Fig. 19.2. The mobile display view and conceptual shared workspace. The second user’s navigation region is shown by a bounding box and is indicated by a red wedge. Other wedges reveal the locations of a POI and a visit wear
Fig. 19.2. The mobile display view and conceptual shared workspace. The second user’s navigation region is shown by a bounding box and is indicated by a red wedge. Other wedges reveal the locations of a POI and a visit wear
Fig. 19.3. A shared projected display shows the location and scale of each user’s view. Clouds provide information about their respective navigation histories
Fig. 19.3. A shared projected display shows the location and scale of each user’s view. Clouds provide information about their respective navigation histories
Fig. 20.1 Controlling the shared surface
Fig. 20.1 Controlling the shared surface
Fig. 20.2 Conceptual design for a system supporting secure distributed user interfaces
Fig. 20.2 Conceptual design for a system supporting secure distributed user interfaces

Related papers

New Challenges in Human Computer Interaction: Strategic Directions and Interdisciplinary Trends
Martina Ziefle

This paper outlines the socio-technical challenges of future Human Computer Interfaces (HCI). Analyzing shortcomings of previous research we introduce major research topics, and consequences for education as well as industrial practise. One of the essentials is that the progress and productivity of high-wage countries do not any more depend exclusively on the technological innovation. Increasingly, the most decisive part is the quality of the human technology interface, and the extent, to which technology respects cognitive, affective and communicative needs of humans. Though, the complexity of HCI designs requires inter-, transand multidisciplinarity appraoches.

View PDFchevron_right
Human-Engaged Computing: the future of Human–Computer Interaction
Xiangshi Ren

CCF Transactions on Pervasive Computing and Interaction

Debates regarding the nature and role of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) have become increasingly common. This is because HCI lacks a clear philosophical foundation from which to derive a coherent vision and consistent aims and goals. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for ongoing discussion that can give more meaningful and pertinent direction to the future of HCI; we call the proposed approach Human-Engaged Computing (HEC). HEC is a focused yet adaptable philosophical approach which aims to establish "synergized interactions between engaged humans and engaging computers for high level wisdom which enhances our human survival probability and our full potential as humans". In this paper, HEC is described through five perspectives-definition, components, principles, case studies and benefits. The paper concludes by suggesting future directions for HEC.

View PDFchevron_right
The Most Important Findings on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI)
Ekamjot Kaur

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2022

The idea of human-computer interaction was born as computer technology progressed. The youthful age group of people who are educated and technically skilled are used in research studies in human computer interaction. In Human-Computer Interaction, this study focuses on the mental model. This review study takes many methods, one of which is to highlight current methodologies, findings, and trends in human-computer interaction, and the other is to identify research that was invented a long time ago but is now falling behind. This study also discusses fidelity prototyping and a user's emotional intelligence to make a product more userfriendly. Why do humans use computers, we investigate in this paper. What is the purpose of a computer system in the human mind? In addition to HCI's computer science. This study examines the literature on humancomputer interaction as well as the technological aspects of human-computer interaction using digital technologies. All these challenges are explored and recommendations for designing good human-computer digital devices are provided. Digital devices have continued to increase in efficiency and processing capacity thanks to advancements in both hardware and software. However, many of these systems are growing in size and complexity. While such intricacy normally offers no problems for most users, it frequently creates impediments for users while utilising digital devices. Typically, when designing those digital devices, the human-computer interaction is overlooked. I.

View PDFchevron_right
Human-Computer Interaction: The Psychological aspects
Ritesh Kandari

2015

This paper discusses the research that has been done in the field of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) relating to human psychology. The overview includes the basic definitions and terminology, a survey of existing technologies and recent advances in the field, common architectures used in the design of HCI systems which includes unimodal and multimodal configurations, and finally the applications of HCI. Human-computer interaction (HCI) is the study of how people design, implement, and use interactive computer systems and how computers affect individuals, organizations, and society. This encompasses not only ease of use but also new interaction techniques for supporting user tasks, providing better access to information, and creating more powerful forms of communication. It involves input and output devices and the interaction techniques that use them; how information is presented and requested; how the computer&#39;s actions are controlled and monitored; all forms of help, document...

View PDFchevron_right
From human factors to human actors: The role of psychology and human-computer interaction studies in system design
sarila rana

Design at work: Cooperative design of computer …, 1991

Man is one of the best general-purpose computers available and if one designs for man as a moron, one ends up with a system that requires a genius to maintain it. Thus we are not suggesting that we take man out of the sys tem, but we are suggesting that he be properly employed in terms of both his abilities and limitations .

View PDFchevron_right
Human Computer Interaction
Prakash Nikam

This paper discusses the research that has been done in the field of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) relating to human psychology. A brief overview of HCI is presented. Specific examples of research in the areas of icons and menus are then reviewed. The results of these experiments and the predictions they make about general human psychology and specific human interaction with computers is discussed. Mental models of user interface interaction are discussed and compared to mental models of real world object. Finally, future directions for research are proposed.

View PDFchevron_right
Enculturating human–computer interaction
Toyoaki Nishida

2009

This special issue of AI and Society is based on a workshop held in conjunction with Intelligent User Interfaces 2008 and brings together selected papers from this workshop as well as additional work on cultural aspects of human–computer interaction. The idea for this workshop was born from discussions in the German–Japanese project CUBE-G1 (CUlture-adaptive BEhavior Generation), which focuses on the challenge of integrating cultural heuristics into the interactive behavior of multimodal systems.

View PDFchevron_right
A research agenda for highly effective human-computer interaction: useful, usable, and universal
Mary Beth Rosson

1999

Research in information and communications technologies has produced advanced networking, high performance hardware, and powerful software environments. However, too often we lose the benefits of these technologies because the user interfaces are poor. A comprehensive plan of research in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) will ensure that users and organizations derive the full benefits of advanced information and communications technologies.

View PDFchevron_right
User Centred System Design-New Perspectives on Human/Computer Interaction
roy pea

This is a seminal and provocative book, focusing on people and how interactive systems can aid their mental work, alone and together. Emerging out of collaborative work by the UCSD group on Human-Machine Interaction and colleagues, it defines anew the map of central issues, questions, and complex tradeoffs facing designers, creators, and users of interactive systems. As the editors emphasize, it is not a how-to book for designers but a guide to new ways of thinking about user-centered system design "from which to derive the new directions in which we must move" (p. 2). The tactic for exposition throughout is primarily one of offering speculative, prescriptive essays that are empirically-informed by introspection, observation, and occasionally, experiments with specific systems. Chapters on related overarching themes are collected in topical sections, with a helpful introductory essay by the editors organizing their commonalities and distinctive points. The six sections escalate in analytic scale from micro to macro, from concerns with individual actions and system understandings to questions of 129

View PDFchevron_right
Human Computer Interaction: Trends and Challenges
IRJET Journal

IRJET, 2022

Overview HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) is the study of how humans interact with computers and how computers respond or are not designed to interact successfully with humans. This research paper provides an overview of the topic of HCI. H. Definitions of various organizations and terms, an overview of existing technologies and recent advances in this field, how the sphere interacts with various other areas of the sphere such as engineering, cognitive and behavioral psychology, and anthropology Human computer interaction, including what to do. , sociology, ergonomics, industrial design and more. Simplicity and value are the main principles by which this paper is structured and the intention of this paper is to provide an overview of HCI and applications or devices, trends and challenges in the HCI space.

View PDFchevron_right

References (294)

  1. Aquino, N., Vanderdonckt, J., Condori-Fernández, N., Tubío, Ó.D., Pastor, O.: Usability evaluation of multi-device/platform user interfaces generated by model-driven engineering. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2010)
  2. Baecker, R.M.: Readings in Groupware and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA (1993)
  3. Ballagas, R., Ringel, M., Stone, M., Borchers, J.: iStuff: a physical user interface toolkit for ubiquitous computing environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 537-544. ACM, New York (2003)
  4. Balme, L., Demeure, A., Barralon, N., Coutaz, J., Calvary, G.: CAMELEON-RT: A software architecture reference model for distributed, migratable, and plastic user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Ambient Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3295, pp. 291-302. Springer, Berlin (2004)
  5. Bandelloni, R., Paterno, F.: Flexible interface migration. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 148-155. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2004)
  6. Baudisch, P., Cutrell, E., Hinckley, K., Gruen, R.: Mouse ether: accelerating the acquisition of targets across multi-monitor displays. In: Extended Abstracts of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1379-1382. ACM Press, New York (2004)
  7. Benko, H., Feiner, S.: Multi-monitor mouse. In: Extended Abstracts of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1208-1211. ACM, New York (2005)
  8. Bharat, K.A., Cardelli, L.: Migratory applications. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 133-142. Association for Computing Machinery, New Yok (1995)
  9. Biehl, J.T., Bailey, B.P.: ARIS: an interface for application relocation in an interactive space. In: Proceedings of the Graphics Interface Conference, pp. 107-116. Canadian Human-Computer Communications Society, School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Ontario (2004)
  10. Biehl, J.T., Bailey, B.P.: A toolset for creating iconic interfaces for interactive workspaces. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3585, pp. 699-712. Springer, Berlin/New York (2005)
  11. Biehl, J.T., Bailey, B.P.: Improving interfaces for managing applications in multiple-device environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 35-42. ACM, New York (2006)
  12. Biehl, J.T., Baker, W.T., Bailey, B.P., Tan, D.S., Inkpen, K.M., Czerwinski, M.: IMPROMPTU: a new interaction framework for supporting collaboration in multiple display environments and its fi eld evaluation for co-located software development. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 939-948. ACM, New York (2008)
  13. Bolt, R.A.: "Put-That-There": voice and gesture at the graphics interface. Comput. Graph. (SIGGRAPH '80 Proceedings) 14 (3), 262-270 (1980)
  14. Booth, K.S., Fisher, B.D., Lin, C.J.R., Argue, R.: The 'mighty mouse' multi-screen collabora- tion tool. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 209-212. ACM, New York (2002)
  15. Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A unifying reference framework for multi-target user interfaces. Interact. Comput. 15 (3), 289-308 (2003)
  16. Coutaz, J., Balme, L., Lachenal, C., Barralon, N.: Software infrastructure for distributed migrat- able user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the UbiHCISys Workshop on UbiComp (2003)
  17. Coutaz, J., Lachenal, C., Dupuy-Chessa, S.: Ontology for multi-surface interaction. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT, pp. 447-454. Springer, Berlin/New York (2003)
  18. Demeure, A., Calvary, G., Sottet, J.S., Vanderdonckt, J.: A reference model for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Task Models and Diagrams for User Interface Design, pp. 79-86. ACM, New York (2005)
  19. Demeure, A., Sottet, J.S., Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Ganneau, V., Vanderdonckt, J.: The 4C refer- ence model for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems, pp. 61-69. IEEE Xplore, Piscataway (2008)
  20. Dey, A.K., Ljungstrand, P., Schmidt, A.: Workshop: Distributed and disappearing user inter- faces in ubiquitous computing. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 487-488. ACM, New York (2001)
  21. Everitt, K., Shen, C., Ryall, K., Forlines, C.: MultiSpace: enabling electronic document micro- mobility in table-centric, multi-device environments. In: Proceedings of IEEE Tabletop, pp. 27-34. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)
  22. Feiner, S., Shamash, A.: Hybrid user interfaces: Breeding virtually bigger interfaces for physically smaller computers. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 9-17. ACM, New York (1991)
  23. Fox, A., Johanson, B., Hanrahan, P., Winograd, T.: Integrating information appliances into an interactive workspace. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 20 (3), 54-65 (2000)
  24. Graham, T.C.N., Urnes, T., Nejabi, R.: Effi cient distributed implementation of semi-replicated synchronous groupware. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 1-10. ACM, New York (1996)
  25. Grolaux, D., Roy, P.V., Vanderdonckt, J.: Migratable user interfaces: beyond migratory inter- faces. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems, pp. 422-430. IEEE Service Center, Piscataway (2004)
  26. Grudin, J.: Partitioning digital worlds: focal and peripheral awareness in multiple monitor use. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 458-465. ACM, New York (2001)
  27. Guimbretière, F., Stone, M.C., Winograd, T.: Fluid interaction with high-resolution wall-size displays. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 21-30. ACM, New York (2001)
  28. Han, R., Perret, V., Naghshineh, M.: WebSplitter: A unifi ed XML framework for multi-device collaborative web browsing. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 221-230. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2000)
  29. Harrison, C.: Appropriated interaction surfaces. IEEE Comput. 43 (6), 86-89 (2010)
  30. Johanson, B., Hutchins, G., Winograd, T., Stone, M.: PointRight: experience with fl exible input redirection in interactive workspaces. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 227-234. ACM, New York (2002)
  31. Johanson, B., Winograd, T., Fox, A.: Interactive workspaces. IEEE Comput. 36 (4), 99-101 (2003)
  32. Johanson, B., Winograd, T., Fox, A.: Invisible computing: interactive workspaces. IEEE Comput. 36 (4), 99-103 (2003)
  33. Kim, K., Javed, W., Williams, C., Elmqvist, N., Irani, P.: Hugin: A framework for awareness and coordination in mixed-presence collaborative information visualization. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces, pp. 231-240. ACM, New York (2010)
  34. Klokmose, C.N., Beaudouin-Lafon, M.: VIGO: instrumental interaction in multi-surface envi- ronments. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 869-878. ACM, New York (2009)
  35. Kobayashi, M., Igarashi, T.: Ninja cursors: using multiple cursors to assist target acquisition on large screens. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 949-958. ACM, New York (2008)
  36. Kohtake, N., Ohsawa, R., Yonezawa, T., Matsukura, Y., Iwai, M., Takashio, K., Tokuda, H.: u-Texture: self-organizable universal panels for creating smart surroundings. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3660, pp. 19-36. Springer, Berlin (2005)
  37. Luyten, K., Coninx, K.: Distributed user interface elements to support smart interaction spaces. In: Proceedings the IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia, pp. 277-286. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)
  38. Melchior, J., Grolaux, D., Vanderdonckt, J., Roy, P.V.: A toolkit for peer-to-peer distributed user interfaces: concepts, implementation, and applications. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing System, pp. 69-78. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2009)
  39. Modahl, M., Agarwalla, B., Abowd, G.D., Ramachandran, U., Saponas, T.S.: Toward a standard ubiquitous computing framework. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Middleware for Pervasive and Ad-hoc Computing, pp. 135-139. ACM, New York (2004)
  40. Modahl, M., Bagrak, I., Wolenetz, M., Hutto, P.W., Ramachandran, U.: MediaBroker: an architecture for pervasive computing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing, pp. 253-262. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)
  41. Mori, G., Paternò, F., Santoro, C.: Design and development of multidevice user interfaces through multiple logical descriptions. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 30 (8), 507-520 (2004)
  42. Myers, B.A., Nichols, J., Wobbrock, J.O., Miller, R.C.: Taking handheld devices to the next level. Computer 37 (12), 36-43 (2004)
  43. Myers, B.A., Stiel, H., Gargiulo, R.: Collaboration using multiple PDAs connected to a PC. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 285-294. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (1998)
  44. Nacenta, M.A., Aliakseyeu, D., Subramanian, S., Gutwin, C.: A comparison of techniques for multi-display reaching. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 371-380. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2005)
  45. Nacenta, M.A., Mandryk, R.L., Gutwin, C.: Targeting across displayless space. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 777-786. ACM, New York (2008)
  46. Nacenta, M.A., Sakurai, S., Yamaguchi, T., Miki, Y., Itoh, Y., Kitamura, Y., Subramanian, S., Gutwin, C.: E-conic: a perspective-aware interface for multi-display environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 279-288. ACM, New York (2007)
  47. Nacenta, M.A., Sallam, S., Champoux, B., Subramanian, S., Gutwin, C.: Perspective cursor: perspective-based interaction for multi-display environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 289-298. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2006)
  48. Pinhanez, C.: The everywhere displays projector: a device to create ubiquitous graphical inter- faces. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2201 , 315-331 (2001)
  49. Ponnekanti, S., Lee, B., Fox, A., Hanrahan, P., Winograd, T.: ICrafter: a service framework for ubiquitous computing environments. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2201, pp. 56-75. Springer, Berlin (2001)
  50. Raskar, R., Welch, G., Cutts, M., Lake, A., Stesin, L., Fuchs, H.: The offi ce of the future: a unifi ed approach to image-based modeling and spatially immersive displays. Comput. Graph. (SIGGRAPH '98 Proceedings) 32 , 179-188 (1998)
  51. Rekimoto, J.: Pick-and-drop: a direct manipulation technique for multiple computer environ- ments. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 31-40. Association for Computing Machinery. New York (1997)
  52. Rekimoto, J., Saitoh, M.: Augmented surfaces: a spatially continuous work space for hybrid computing environments. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 378-385. ACM, New York (1999)
  53. Rekimoto, J., Ullmer, B., Oba, H.: DataTiles: a modular platform for mixed physical and graphical interactions. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 269-276. ACM, New York (2001)
  54. Robertson, S., Wharton, C., Ashworth, C., Franzke, M.: Dual device user interface design: PDAs and interactive television. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 79-86. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (1996)
  55. Rogers, Y., Lindley, S.E.: Collaborating around vertical and horizontal large interactive displays: which way is best? Interact. Comput. 16 (6), 1133-1152 (2004)
  56. Román, M., Hess, C., Cerqueira, R., Ranganathan, A., Campbell, R.H., Nahrstedt, K.: Gaia: A middleware infrastructure for active spaces. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 1 (4), 74-83 (2002)
  57. Shen, C., Everitt, K., Ryall, K.: UbiTable: impromptu face-to-face collaboration on horizontal interactive surfaces. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2864, pp. 281-288. Springer, Berlin (2003)
  58. Sousa, J.P., Garlan, D.: Aura: an architectural framework for user mobility in ubiquitous computing environments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 29-43. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002)
  59. Stefi k, M., Bobrow, D.G., Foster, G., Lanning, S., Tatar, D.G.: WYSIWIS revised: early experiences with multiuser interfaces. ACM Trans. Offi ce Info. Syst. 5 (2), 147-167 (1987)
  60. Streitz, N.A., Geissler, J., Holmer, T., Konomi, S., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Reischl, W., Rexroth, P., Seitz, P., Steinmetz, R.: i-LAND: an interactive landscape for creativity and innovation. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 120-127. Addison-WesleyAssociation for Computing Machinery, Addison-Wesley, Harlow/ New York (1999)
  61. Streitz, N.A., Rexroth, P., Holmer, T.: Does 'roomware' matter? investigating the role of personal and public information devices and their combination in meeting room collaboration. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 297-312. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London (1997)
  62. Streitz, N.A., Tandler, P., Müller-Tomfelde, C.: Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millenium, Chap. Roomware: Towards the Next Generation of Human-Computer Interaction based on an Integrated Design of Real and Virtual Worlds, pp. 553-578. Addison Wesley, Harlow (2001)
  63. Tan, D.S., Meyers, B., Czerwinski, M.: WinCuts: manipulating arbitrary window regions for more effective use of screen space. In: Extended Abstracts of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1525-1528. ACM, New York (2004)
  64. Tandler, P.: Software infrastructure for ubiquitous computing environments: supporting synchro- nous collaboration with heterogeneous devices. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2201 , 96-115 (2001)
  65. Tandler, P., Prante, T., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Streitz, N., Steinmetz, R.: ConnecTables: dynamic coupling of displays for the fl exible creation of shared workspaces. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 11-20. ACM, New York (2001)
  66. Terrenghi, L., Quigley, A.J., Dix, A.J.: A taxonomy for and analysis of multi-person-display ecosystems. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 13 (8), 583-598 (2009)
  67. Thevenin, D., Coutaz, J.: Plasticity of user interfaces: framework and research agenda. In: Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT, pp. 110-117. IOS Press, Ohmsha (1999)
  68. Vanderdonckt, J.: Distributed user interfaces: How to distribute user interface elements across users, platforms, and environments. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Interaccion (2010)
  69. Vanderdonckt, J., Mendonca, H., Massó, J.P.M.: Distributed user interfaces in ambient envi- ronment. Commun. Comput. Info. Sci. 11 (3), 121-130 (2008)
  70. Vandervelpen, C., Coninx, K.: Towards model-based design support for distributed user inter- faces. In: Proceedings of the Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 61-70. ACM, New York (2004)
  71. Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.: Multi-pointer and collaborative system for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the ACM Mobile HCI Conference, pp. 435-438. ACM, New York (2010)
  72. Wallace, J., Ha, V., Ziola, R., Inkpen, K.: Swordfi sh: user tailored workspaces in multi-display environments. In: Extended Abstracts of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1487-1492. ACM, New York (2006)
  73. Wallace, J.R., Mandryk, R.L., Inkpen, K.M.: Comparing content and input redirection in MDEs. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 157-166. ACM, New York (2008)
  74. Weiser, M.: The computer for the twenty-fi rst century. Sci. Am. 3 (265), 94-104 (1991) 75.
  75. Wellner, P.: Interacting with paper on the DigitalDesk. Commun. ACM 36 (7), 86-96 (1993)
  76. Wellner, P., Mackay, W., Gold, R.: Introduction to the special issue on computer-augmented environments: back to the real world. Commun. ACM 36 (7), 24 (1993)
  77. Wigdor, D., Jiang, H., Forlines, C., Borkin, M., Shen, C.: WeSpace: the design development and deployment of a walk-up and share multi-surface visual collaboration system. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1237-1246. ACM, New York (2009)
  78. Wilson, A., Shafer, S.: XWand: UI for intelligent spaces. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 545-552. ACM, New York (2003) References
  79. Bowen, J., Reeves, S.: Using formal models to design user interfaces: a case study. In: Proceedings of the BCS-HCI '07, pp. 159-166. Swinton (2007)
  80. Chi, U.: Formal specifi cation of user interfaces: a comparison and evaluation of four axiomatic approaches. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 11 , 671-685 (1985)
  81. Vanderdonckt, J.: Distributed user interfaces: how to distribute user interface elements across users, platforms, and environments. In: Proceedings of 7th Congreso Internacional de Interacción Persona-Ordenador Interacción . (2010) (Valencia, 7-10 September 2010), J.L. Garrido, F. Paterno, J. Panach, K. Benghazi, N. Aquino (Eds.), AIPO, Valencia, 2010, pp. 3-14
  82. Calvary, G., Coutaz, G., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A unifying reference framework for multi-target user interfaces. Interact. Comput. 15 (3), 289-308 (2003)
  83. Demeure, A., Calvary, G., Sottet, J.S., Vanderdonckt, J.: A reference model for distributed user interfaces. In Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Task models and diagrams (TAMODIA '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 79-86 (2005)
  84. Demeure, A., Sottet, S., Calvary, G., Coutaz, G., Ganneau, J., Vanderdonckt, J.: The 4c refer- ence model for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems ICAS 2008, pp. 61-69. Gosier (2008)
  85. Reichart, D.: A.: task models as basis for requirements engineering and software execution. In: Proceedings of TAMODIA 2003, pp. 51-58. ACM Press, New York (2004)
  86. Gallud, J.A., Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Sebastian, G., Molina, S., Navarrete, A.: Gesture- based interaction: Concept map and application scenarios. In: Proceedings of The 3rd International Conference on Advances in Human-Oriented and Personalized Mechanisms, Technologies and Services. CENTRIC 2010, pp. 28-33. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2010)
  87. Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.A.: Multi-pointer and collaborative system for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. MobileHCI '10, pp. 435-438. ACM, New York (2010)
  88. Vanderhulst, G.: Dynamic distributed user interfaces: Supporting mobile interaction spaces (2005) Phd. Thesis. Universiteit Hassell (Belgium) References
  89. Tan, D.S., Czerwinski, M.: Effects of visual separation and physical discontinuities when distributing information across multiple displays. In: Proceedings of INTERACT'03, pp. 252-260. IOS, Zurich (2003) References
  90. Blumendorf, M., Roscher, D., Albayrak, S.: Dynamic user interface distribution for fl exible multimodal interaction. In: Proceedings ICMI-MLMI ¢ 10, Beijing, pp. 8-12 (2010)
  91. Coutaz J., Nigay L., Salber D., Blandford A, May J., Young, R.: Four easy pieces for assessing the usability of multimodal interaction: The CARE properties. In: Proceedings INTERACT 1995, Lillehammer, pp. 115-120 (1995)
  92. Demeure, A., Sottet, J.S., Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Ganneau, V., Vanderdonckt, J.: The 4C refer- ence model for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems, Washington, DC, pp. 61-69 (2008)
  93. Fonseca, J.M.C. (ed.): W3C Model-based UI XG Final Report, May 2010. http://www. w3.org/2005/Incubator/model-based-ui/XGR-mbui-20100504/
  94. Manca, M., Paternò F.: Supporting multimodality in service-oriented model-based development environments. In: Proceedings HCSE 2010, 3rd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering, LNCS 6409, pp. 135-148. Springer, Reykjavik (2010)
  95. Melchior, J., Vanderdonckt, J.: A model-based approach for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings ACM EICS 2011, Pisa (2011)
  96. Paternò, F., Santoro, C., Spano, L.D.: MARIA: a universal, declarative, multiple abstraction- level language for service-oriented applications in ubiquitous environments. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 16 (4) pp. 19:1-29 (2009)
  97. Vandervelpen, C., Conix, K.: Towards model-based design support for distributed user inter- faces. In: NordiCHI 2004, Tampere, pp. 61-70 (2004) References
  98. Arvola, M., Larsson, A.: Regulating prominence: a design pattern for co-located collaboration. In: Cooperative Systems Design: Scenario-Based Design of Collaborative Systems, Proceedings of COOP 04, 6th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems. IOS Press, Amsterdam/Washington, DC (2004)
  99. Berglund, A., Berglund, E., Larsson, A., Bang, M.: Paper remote: an augmented television guide and remote control. U. Access Info. Soc. 4 , 300-327 (2006)
  100. Bharat, K.A., Cardelli, L.: Migratory applications. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface and Software Technology, UIST '95, pp. 132-142. ACM, New York (1995)
  101. Bång, M., Larsson, A., Berglund, E., Eriksson, H.: Distributed user interfaces for clinical ubiq- uitous computing applications. Int. J. Med. Inform. 74 (7-8), 545-551 (2005)
  102. Demeure, A., Calvary, G., Sottet, J.-S., Vanderdonkt, J.: A reference model for distributed user interfaces. In: TAMODIA '05: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Task Models and Diagrams, pp. 79-86. ACM, New York (2005)
  103. Grolaux, D.: Transparent Migration and Adaptation in a Graphical User Interface Toolkit. Ph.D. thesis, Université catholique de Louvain. http://www.isys.ucl.ac.be/bchi/publications/ Ph.D.Theses/Grolaux-PhD2007.pdf
  104. Melchior, J., Grolaux, D., Vanderdonckt, J., Van Roy, P.: A toolkit for peer-to-peer distributed user interfaces: concepts, implementation, and applications. In: EICS '09: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, pp. 69-78. ACM, New York (2009)
  105. Sjölund, M., Larsson, A., Berglund, E.: Smartphone views: building multi-device distributed user interfaces. In: Mobile Human-Computer Interaction -Mobile HCI 2004. Springer, Berlin/ New York (2004)
  106. Sjölund, M., Larsson, A., Berglund, E.: The walk-away gui : interface distribution to mobile devices. In: IASTED-HCI 2005, p. 114. ACTA Press, Anaheim (2005)
  107. Smith, G., Rodden, T.: Sol: a shared object toolkit for cooperative interfaces. Int. J. Hum.- Comput. Stud. 42 (2), 207-234 (1995)
  108. zlangpop: Programming Language Popularity. http://langpop.com . (2011)
  109. zztiobe: TIOBE Programming Community Index. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/ paperinfo/tpci/index.html . (2011) References
  110. Alarcón, R.A., Guerrero, L.A., Ochoa, S.F., Pino, J.A.: Context in collaborative mobile sce- narios. Proceedings of 1st. International Workshop on Context and Group Work . Paris, France, 5-8, July.
  111. Collazos, C., Guerrero, L., Pino, J., Ochoa, S.: Introducing shared-knowledge-awareness. In: Proceedings of IASTED Information and Knowledge Sharing Conference , St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, USA, (2002) 13-18
  112. Correa, C., Marsic, I.: A fl exible architecture to support awareness in heterogeneous collaborative environments. In: Proceedings of CTS 2003, Orlando, pp. 69-77 (2003)
  113. Coutaz, J., Lachenal, C., Calvary, G., Thevenin, D.: Software architecture adaptivity for multisurface interaction and plasticity. In: IFIP Workshop on Software Architecture Requirements for CSCW 2000 Workshop, Philadelphia (2000)
  114. Demeure, A., Sottet, J-S., Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Ganneau, V., Vanderdonckt, J.: The 4C reference model for distributed user interfaces. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems (ICAS'08) 2008: 61-69
  115. Dourish, P., Belloti, V.: Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'92) (1992)
  116. Luyten, K., Van den Bergha, J., Vandervelpena, C., Coninx, K.: Designing distributed user interfaces for ambient intelligent environments using models and simulations. Comput. Graph. 30 (5), (2006) 702-713
  117. Molina Massó, J.P., Vanderdonckt, J., González López, P., Fernández-Caballero, A., Lozano Pérez, M.D.: Rapid prototyping of distributed user interfaces. Proceedings of Computer Aided Design of User Interfaces V (2007) (CADUI 2007) 151-166
  118. Palfreyman, K.A., Rodden, T.: A protocol for user awareness on the World Wide Web. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'96) , (1996) 130-139
  119. Ruiz Penichet, V.M., Lozano, M.D., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R.: Requirement-based approach for groupware environments design. J. Syst. Software 83 (8), 1478-1488 (2010)
  120. Sendín, M., Collazos, C.A.: Implicit plasticity framework: a client-side generic framework for collaborative activities, Lecture Notes on Computer Science. Groupware: Design, Implementation and Use , V. 4154/2006, pp: 219-227. 12th International Workshop, CRIWG 2006, Medina del Campo, Spain. Springer Verlag
  121. Sendín, M., López, J.M.: Contributions of dichotomic view of plasticity to seamlessly embed accessibility and adaptivity support in user interfaces. Adv. Eng. Software 40 , 1261-1270 (2009) References
  122. Dey, A., Abowd, G.D., Salber, D.: A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Hum. Comput. Interact. 16 , 97-166 (2001)
  123. Endsley, M.: Towards a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum. Factors 37 (1), 32-64 (1995)
  124. Greenberg, S.: The 1988 conference on computer-supported cooperative work: trip report. ACM SIGCHI Bull. 21 (1), 49-55 (1989)
  125. Greif, I.: Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1988)
  126. Grudin, J.: CSCW: history and focus. University of California. IEEE Comput. 27 (5), 19-26 (1994)
  127. Horn, D.B., Finholt, T.A., Birnholtz, J.P., Motwani, D., Jayaraman, S.: Six degrees of Jonathan Grudin: a social network analysis of the evolution and impact of CSCW research. In: ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Hangzhou, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 582-591 (2004)
  128. Johansen, R.: Groupware: Computer Support for Business Teams. The Free, New York (1988)
  129. Johnson-Lenz, P., Johnson-Lenz, T.: In: Hiltz, S., Kerr, E. (eds.) Consider the Groupware: Design and Group Process Impacts on Communication in the Electronic Medium. New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark (1981)
  130. Penichet, V.M.R., Lozano, M.D., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R.: User interface analysis for group- ware applications in the TOUCHE process model. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Softw. (ADES). 40 (12), (2009)
  131. Penichet, V.M.R., Lozano, M.D., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R.: Requirement-based approach for groupware environments design. J. Syst. Softw. (JSS). 83 (8), 1478-1488 doi: 10.1016/j. jss.2010.03.029
  132. Poltrock, S., Grudin, J.: CSCW, groupware and workfl ow: experiences, state of art, and future trends. In: CHI '99 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania). CHI '99, pp. 120-121. ACM, New York (1999)
  133. Poltrock, S., Grudin, J.: Computer supported cooperative work and groupware (CSCW). In: Interact 2005, Rome (2005) References
  134. Bardram, J.E., Bossen, C.: Mobility work -the spatial dimension of collaboration at a hospital. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 14 (2), 131-160 (2005)
  135. Bardram, J.E., Christensen, H.B.: Pervasive computing support for hospitals: an overview of the activity-based computing project. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 6 (1), 44-51 (2007)
  136. Bardram, J.E., Bunde-Pedersen, J., Soegaard, M.: Support for activity-based computing in a personal computing operating system. In: CHI '06: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 211-220. ACM, New York (2006a)
  137. Bardram, J.E., Bunde-pedersen, J., Soegaard, M.: Support for activity-based computing in a personal computing operating system. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI, pp. 211-220. ACM, New York (2006b)
  138. Bardram, J.E., Bunde-Pedersen, J., Doryab, A., Sørensen, S.: Clinical surfaces-activity-based computing for distributed multi-display environments in hospitals. In: Proceedings of the 12th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Part II, INTERACT '09, pp. 704-717. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2009)
  139. Bardram, J.E., Doryab, A., Jensen, R.M., Lange, P.M., Nielsen, K.L.G., Petersen, S.T.: Phase recognition during surgical procedures using embedded and body-worn sensors. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom) 2011, pp. 45-53. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2011)
  140. Biehl, J.T., Baker, W.T., Bailey, B.P., Tan, D.S., Inkpen, K.M., Czerwinski, M.: Impromptu: a new interaction framework for supporting collaboration in multiple display environments and its fi eld evaluation for co-located software development. In: CHI '08: Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 939-948. ACM, New York (2008)
  141. Hess, C.K., Román, M., Campbell, R.H.: Building applications for ubiquitous computing environments. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Pervasive Computing, Pervasive '02, pp. 16-29. Springer, London (2002)
  142. Johanson, B., Fox, A., Winograd, T.: The interactive workspaces project: experiences with ubiquitous computing rooms. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 1 (2), 67-74 (2002)
  143. Streitz, N.A., Geißler, J., Holmer, T., Konomi, S., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Reischl, W., Rexroth, P., Seitz, P., Steinmetz, R.: i-land: an interactive landscape for creativity and innovation. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: The CHI Is the Limit, CHI '99, pp. 120-127. ACM, New York (1999)
  144. Terrenghi, L., May, R., Baudisch, P., MacKay, W., Paternò, F., Thomas, J., Billinghurst, M.: Information visualization and interaction techniques for collaboration across multiple displays. In: CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '06, pp. 1643- 1646. ACM, New York (2006)
  145. Bergh, J.V.D., Meixner, G., Breiner, K., Pleuss, A., Sauer, S., Hussmann, H.: Model-driven development of advanced user interfaces. In CHI Extended Abstracts (2010) 4429-4432
  146. EHEA, European Higher Education Area. http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning- policy/doc62_en.htm . Accessed 1 Jan 2011
  147. 9 Improving E-Learning Using Distributed User Interfaces
  148. Ertl, D., Kaindl, H., Arnautovic, E., Falb, J., Popp, R., Generating High-Level Interaction Models out of Ontologies, in Proceedings of 2nd Workshop of Semantic Models for Adaptive Interactive Systems, S. 5, Palo Alto, CA, US, 2011
  149. Fardoun, H.M., Villanueva, P. G., Garrido, J.E., Rivera, G.S., López, S. R., Instructional m-Learning system design based on learners: MPrinceTool. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Fifth International Multi-conference on Computing in the Global Information Technology (ICCGI '10), pp. 220-225. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2010)
  150. ITU, International Telecommunication Union: Measuring the information society. Link: http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/2010/Material/MIS_2010_Summary_E.pdf (2010). Accessed 12 May 2010
  151. Kray, C., Nesbitt, D., Dawson, J., Rohs, M., 2010. User-defi ned gestures for connecting mobile phones, public displays, and tabletops. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services (MobileHCI 10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 239-248
  152. Tesoriero, R., Fardoun, H. M., Gallud, J. A., Lozano, M. D., Penichet, V. M. R, Interactive Learning Panels. Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Town and Country Resort & Convention Center, San Diego, CA, USA, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ISSN: 0302-9743, vol 5613, pp. 236-245. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg
  153. Villanueva, P. G., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R., WallShare: Multi-pointer and Collaborative sys- tem for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '10), pp. 435-438. ACM, New York (2010)
  154. Villanueva, P. G., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R., WallShare: A Collaborative Multi-pointer System for Portable Devices. PPD10: Workshop on coupled display visual interfaces. 25 Mayo, 2010. Rome, Italy References
  155. Bederson, B., Grosjean, J., Meyer, J.: Toolkit design for interactive structured graphics. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30 , 535-546 (2004)
  156. Bharat, K., Brown, M.H.: Building distributed, multi-user applications by direct manipulation. In: Proceedings of UIST 1994, pp. 71-80. Marina del Rey, New York (1994)
  157. Collins, D.: Designing Object-Oriented User Interfaces, 1st edn. Benjamin-Cummings Publishing, Redwood City (1994)
  158. db4o. Native java & .net open source object database. http://www.db4o.com . Accessed 14 June 2011
  159. Gerken, J., Jetter, H.-C., Zoellner, M., Mader, M., Reiterer, H.: The concept maps method as a tool to evaluate the usability of apis. In: Proceedings of CHI 2011, pp. 3373-3382. Vancouver, New York (2011)
  160. Gossman, J.: The attached behavior pattern. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/johngossman/ archive/2008/05/07/the-attached-behavior-pattern.aspx . Accessed 14 June 2011
  161. Gossman, J.: Introduction to the model view viewmodel pattern. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ johngossman/archive/2005/10/08/478683.aspx . Accessed 14 June 2011
  162. Jetter, H.-C., Gerken, J., Zöllner, M., Reiterer, H.: Model-based design and prototyping of interactive spaces for information interaction. In: Proceedings of HCSE 2010, pp. 22-37. Reykjavik, Berlin (2010)
  163. Jetter, H.-C., Gerken, J., Zoellner, M., Reiterer, H., Milic-Frayling, N.: Materializing the query with facet-streams -a hybrid surface for collaborative search on tabletops. In: Proceedings of CHI 2011, pp. 3013-3022. Vancouver, New York (2011)
  164. Jetter, H.-C., König, W.A., Gerken, J., Reiterer, H.: Zoil -a cross-platform user interface paradigm for personal information management. Personal Information Management: The dis- appearing desktop (a CHI 2008 Workshop)
  165. König, W., Rädle, R., Reiterer, H.: Interactive design of multimodal user interfaces -reducing technical and visual complexity. J. Multimod. User Interfaces 3 (3), 197-213 (2010)
  166. Lawson, J., Al-Akkad, A., Vanderdonckt, J., Macq, B.: An open source workbench for prototyping multimodal interactions based on off-the-shelf heterogeneous components. In: Proceedings of EICS 09, Pittsburgh, pp. 245-254. Pittsburgh, New York (2009)
  167. Mandel, T.: The GUI-OOUI War, Windows vs. OS/2: The Designer's Guide to Human- Computer Interfaces. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1994)
  168. Melchior, J., Grolaux, D., Vanderdonckt, J., Van Roy, P.: A toolkit for peer-to-peer distributed user interfaces: Concepts, implementation, and applications. In: Proceedings of EICS 2009, pp. 69-78. Pittsburgh, New York (2009)
  169. Pawson, R.: Naked objects. PhD thesis, Trinity College, Dublin (2004)
  170. Perlin, K., Fox, D.: Pad: An alternative approach to the computer interface. In: Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 93, pp. 57-64. Anaheim, New York
  171. Project Deskpiles. http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/deskpiles . Accessed 14 June 2011
  172. Project Permaedia/ZOIL. http://hci.uni-konstanz.de/permaedia . Accessed 14 June 2011 19. Project ZOIL on Codeplex. http://zoil.codeplex.com . Accessed June 14, 2011
  173. Raskin, J.: The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading/Boston, New York (2000)
  174. Shen, C., Vernier, F., Forlines, C., Ringel, M.: Diamondspin: an extensible toolkit for around- the-table interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI 2004, pp. 167-174. Vienna, New York (2004) References
  175. Borchers, J., Buschmann, F.: A Pattern Approach to Interaction Design. Wiley, Chichester (2001)
  176. Goldberg, D.: What every computer scientist should know about fl oating-point arithmetic. ACM Comput. Surv. 23 , 5-48 (1991). doi: 10.1145/103162.103163
  177. Haller, M., Brandl, P., Leithinger, D., Leitner, J., Seifried, T., Billinghurst, M.: Shared design space: sketching ideas using digital pens and a large augmented tabletop setup. In: Advances in artifi cial reality and tele-existence, pp. 185-196 (2006). Springer, Berlin
  178. Haller, M., Leitner, J., Seifried, T., Wallace, J., Scott, S., Richter, C., Brandl, P., Gokcezade, A.: The NiCE discussion room: integrating paper and digital media to support co-located group meetings. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2010. ACM, New York (2010)
  179. Hofmeester, K., Wixon, D.: Using metaphors to create a natural user interface for microsoft surface. In: Extended Abstracts CHI 2010. ACM Press, New York (2010)
  180. Hutchins, E., Hollan, J., Norman, D.: Direct manipulation interfaces. Hum. Comput. Interact. 1 (4), 311-338 (1985)
  181. Jacob, R.J.K., Girouard, A., Hirshfi eld, L.M., Horn, M.S., Shaer, O., Solovey, E.T., Zigelbaum, J.: Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2008. ACM, New York (2008)
  182. Jetter, H.C., Gerkin, J., Milic-Frayling, N., Oleksik, G., Reiterer, H., Jones, R., Baumberg, J.: Deskpiles. http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/deskpiles (2009). Accessed 16 June 2011
  183. Jetter, H.C., Gerken, J., Zöllner, M., Reiterer, H.: Model-based design and prototyping of inter- active spaces for information interaction. In: Proceedings of the HCSE 2010. Springer, New York (2010)
  184. Jetter, H.C., Gerken, J., Zöllner, M., Reiterer, H., Milic-Frayling, N.: Materializing the query with facet-streams -a hybrid surface for collaborative search on tabletops. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2011. ACM, New York (2011)
  185. Melchior, J., Grolaux, D., Vanderdonckt, J., Van Roy, P.: A toolkit for peer-to-peer distributed user interfaces: concepts, implementation, and applications. In: Proceedings of the EICS '09. ACM, New York (2009)
  186. Perlin, K., Fox, D.: Pad: an alternative approach to the computer interface. In: Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH 1993. ACM, New York (1993)
  187. Raskin, J.: The Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems. Addison- Wesley, Boston (2000)
  188. Shaer, O., Jacob, R.J.K.: A specifi cation paradigm for the design and implementation of tangible user interfaces. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 16 (4), 20:1-20:39 (2009). doi: 10.1145/1614390.1614395
  189. Smith, J.: WPF apps with the model-view-ViewModel design pattern. MSDN Magazine. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd419663.aspx (2009). Accessed 16 June 2011
  190. Wigdor, D., Shen, C., Forlines, C., Balakrishnan, R.: Table-centric interactive spaces for real-time collaboration. In: Proceedings of the AVI 2006. ACM, New York (2006)
  191. Zöllner, M., Jetter, H.C.: ZOIL framework. http://zoil.codeplex.com/ (2010). Accessed 16 June 2011
  192. N. Kaviani (*) • M. Finke • R. Lea • S. Fels Media and Graphics Interdisciplinary Centre , University of British Columbia , Vancouver , Canada e-mail: nkaviani@cs.ubc.ca ; martinf@ece.ubc.ca ; rodgerl@ece.ubc.ca ; ssfels@ece.ubc.ca Chapter 12 Investigating the Design Space for Multi-display Environments
  193. Nima Kaviani , Matthias Finke , Rodger Lea , and Sidney Fels References
  194. Ballagas, R., Rohs, M., Sheridan, J., Borchers, J.: The smart phone: a ubiquitous input device. IEEE Pervas. Comput. 5 (1), 70-77 (2006)
  195. Carter, S., Churchill, E., Denoue, L., Helfman, J., Nelson, L.: Digital graffi ti: public annotation of multimedia content. In: CHI '04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '04, pp. 1207-1210, ACM Press, Vienna, 24-29 April 2004
  196. Dix, A., Sas, C.: Public displays and private devices: a design space analysis. In: WSh. On Designing and Evaluating Mobile Phone-Based Interaction with Public Displays. CHI2008, Florence, 5 April 2008
  197. Dix, A.: Small meets large: research issues for using personal devices to interact with public displays (unpublished) internal discussion paper, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Jan 2005
  198. Finke, M., Tang, A., Leung, R., Blackstock, M.: Lessons learned: game design for large public displays. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (DIMEA 2008), Athens, Greece, 10-12 Sep 2008
  199. Jin, C., Takahashi, S., Tanaka, J.: Interaction between small size device and large screen in public space. J. Knowledge-based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems. 4253(3), 197-204 (2006)
  200. Kaviani, N., Finke, M., Lea, R.: Encouraging crowd interaction with large displays using hand- held devices. In: Crowd Computer Interaction Workshop at CHI 2009, Boston, 4-9 April 2009
  201. Nestler, S., Echtler, F., Dippon, A., Klinker, G.: Collaborative problem solving on mobile hand-held devices and stationary multi-touch interfaces. In: PPD 08 WSh. On Designing Multi-Touch Interaction Techniques for Coupled Public and Private Displays, Naples, Italy, May 31 2008
  202. Norman, D.: "Psychology of Everyday Action". The Design of Everyday Things, pp. 45-46. Basic Book, New York (1988)
  203. Schoning J., Rohs M., Krüger A. Using mobile phones to spontaneously authenticate and interact with multi-touch surfaces. In: PPD 08 WSh. On Designing Multi-Touch Interaction Techniques for Coupled Public and Private Displays, Naples, Italy, May 31 2008 Referen ces
  204. Baudisch, P., Rosenholtz, R.: Halo: a technique for visualizing off-screen objects. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '03), pp. 481-488. ACM, New York (2003)
  205. Baudisch, P., Cutrell, E., Hinckley, K., Gruen, R.: Mouse ether: accelerating the acquisition of targets across multi-monitor displays. In: CHI '04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '04), pp. 1379-1382. ACM, New York (2004)
  206. Cao, X., Li, J.J., Balakrishnan, R.: Peephole pointing: modeling acquisition of dynamically revealed targets. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08), pp. 1699-1708. ACM, New York (2008)
  207. Cauchard, J.R., Fraser, M., Han, T., Subramanian, S.: Offsetting displays on mobile projector phones. In: Journal on Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, pp. 1-11. Springer, London (2011)
  208. Cowan, L.G., Li, K.A.: ShadowPuppets: supporting collocated interaction with mobile projec- tor phones using hand shadows. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11), pp. 2707-2716. ACM, New York (2011)
  209. Dao, V.N., Hosoi, K., Sugimoto, M.: A semi-automatic realtime calibration technique for a handheld projector. In: Spencer, S.N. (ed.) Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (VRST '07), pp. 43-46. ACM, New York (2007)
  210. Fitzmaurice, G.W.: Situated information spaces and spatially aware palmtop computers. Commun. ACM 36 (7), 39-49 (1993)
  211. Hang, A., Rukzio, E., Greaves, A.: Projector phone: a study of using mobile phones with integrated projector for interaction with maps. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '08), pp. 207-216. ACM, New York (2008)
  212. Hürst, W., Bilyalov, T.: Dynamic versus static peephole navigation of VR panoramas on hand- held devices. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM '10), ACM, New York, Article 25, 8 pp (2010)
  213. Löchtefeld, M., Schöning, J., Rohs, M., Krüger, A.: Marauders light: replacing the wand with a mobile camera projector unit. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM '09), ACM, New York, Article 19, 4 pp (2009)
  214. Mandryk, R.L., Rodgers, M.E., Inkpen, K.M.: Sticky widgets: pseudo-haptic widget enhance- ments for multi-monitor displays. In: CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '05), pp. 1621-1624. ACM, New York (2005)
  215. Mehra, S., Werkhoven, P., Worring, M.: Navigating on handheld displays: dynamic versus static peephole navigation. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 13 (4), 448-457 (2006)
  216. Nacenta, M.A., Sallam, S., Champoux, B., Subramanian, S., Gutwin, C.: Perspective cursor: perspective-based interaction for multi-display environments. In: Grinter, R., Rodden, T., Aoki, P., Cutrell, E., Jeffries, R., Olson, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06), pp. 289-298. ACM, New York (2006)
  217. Rapp, S.: Spotlight navigation: a pioneering user interface for mobile projection. In: Ubiprojection 2010, Workshop on Personal Projection in Conjunction with Pervasive 2010, Helsinki (2010)
  218. Ramesh, R., van Baar, J., Beardsley, P., Willwacher, T., Rao, S., Forlines, C.: iLamps: geo- metrically aware and self-confi guring projectors. In: Fujii, J. (ed.) ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses (SIGGRAPH '05). ACM, New York (2005). Article 5
  219. Ramesh, R., Beardsley, P., van Baar, J., Wang, Y., Dietz, P., Lee, J., Leigh, D., Willwacher, T.: RFIG lamps: interacting with a self-describing world via photosensing wireless tags and projectors. In: Fujii, J. (ed.) ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses (SIGGRAPH '05). ACM, New York (2005). Article 7
  220. Rohs, M., Schöning, J., Raubal, M., Essl, G., Krüger, A.: Map navigation with mobile devices: virtual versus physical movement with and without visual context. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI '07), pp. 146-153. ACM, New York (2007)
  221. Schöning, J., Rohs, M., Kratz, S., Löchtefeld, M., Krüger, A.: Map torchlight: a mobile augmented reality camera projector unit. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '09), pp. 3841-3846. ACM, New York (2009)
  222. Shneiderman, B.: Direct manipulation: a step beyond programming languages. In: Baecker, R.M. (ed.) Human-Computer Interaction. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1987)
  223. Su, R.E., Bailey, B.P.: Put them where? Towards guidelines for positioning large displays in interactive workspaces. In: Proceedings of the Interact '05, pp. 337-349. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2005)
  224. Tan, D.S., Czerwinski, M.: Effects of visual separation and physical discontinuities when distributing information across multiple displays. In INTERACT (2003)
  225. Willis, K.D.D., Poupyrev, I., Shiratori, T.: Motionbeam: a metaphor for character interaction with handheld projectors. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11), pp. 1031-1040. ACM, New York (2011)
  226. Yee, K.-P.: Peephole displays: pen interaction on spatially aware handheld computers. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '03), pp. 1-8. ACM, New York (2003) References
  227. Windows Live Mesh. http://explore.live.com/windows-live-mesh (2011)
  228. Dropbox. http://www.dropbox.com/
  229. Skype. http://www.skype.com/
  230. Penichet, Víctor M.R., Lozano, María D., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R.: CE4WEB: Una Herramienta CASE Colaborativa para el Modelado de Aplicaciones con UML (2007)
  231. Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.A.: Multi-pointer and collaborative system for mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the Mobile HCI'10, pp. 435-438. ACM, New York (2010)
  232. Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J., Michotte, B., Bouillon, L., López-Jaquero, V.: USIXML: a language supporting multi-path development of user interfaces. In: Bastide, R., Palanque, P., Roth, J. (eds.) DSV-IS 2004 and EHCI 2004. LNCS, vol. 3425, pp. 200-220. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
  233. Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A unifying reference framework for multi-target user interfaces. Interact. Comput. 15 (3), 289-308 (2003)
  234. UsiXML, USer Interface eXtensible Markup Language. http://www.usixml.org
  235. Ellis, C., Gibbs, S., et al.: Groupware: some issues and experiences. Commun. ACM 34 (1), 39-58 (1991)
  236. Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: A descriptive framework of workspace awareness for real-time groupware. CSCW 11 (3-4), 411-446 (2002). Special Issue on Awareness in CSCW, Kluwer Academic Press
  237. Websockets. http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/
  238. HTML5. http://www.w3.org/TR/html5
  239. Blackwell, A., Fitzmaurice, G., Holmquist, L.E., Ishii, H., Ullmer, H.: Tangible user interfaces in context and theory workshop of CHI 2007, San Jose, 28 April-3 May 2007
  240. Calvary, G., Coutaz, J., Thevenin, D., Limbourg, Q., Bouillon, L., Vanderdonckt, J.: A unifying reference framework for multi-target user interfaces. Interact. Comput. 15 (3), 289-308 (2003)
  241. Finkenzeller, K.: RFID Handbook: Fundamentals and Applications in Contactless Smart Cards and Identifi cation. Wiley, New York (2003)
  242. Kubicki, S., Lepreux, S., Kolski, C., Caelen, J.: Towards new human-machine systems in contexts involving interactive table and tangible objects. In: 11th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IEA Symposium on Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Human-Machine Systems, Valenciennes, France (2010)
  243. Kubicki, S., Lepreux, S., Kolski, C.: Evaluation of an interactive table with tangible objects: Application with children in a classroom. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Child Computer Interaction "UI Technologies and Educational Pedagogy", at CHI'2011, Vancouver, May 2011
  244. Lepreux, S., Kubicki, S., Kolski, C., Caelen, J.: Distributed interactive surfaces using tangible and virtual objects. In: Proceedings of the Workshop DUI'2011 "Distributed User Interfaces", at CHI'2011, pp. 65-68. Vancouver, May 2011. ISBN 978-84-693-9829-6
  245. Lepreux, S., Vanderdonckt, J., Michotte, B.: Visual design of user interfaces by (de)composi- tion. In: Doherty, G., Blandford, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Design, Specifi cation and Verifi cation of Interactive Systems DSV-IS'2006 (Dublin), Springer, LNCS, Berlin, pp. 157-170, 26-28 July 2006
  246. Melchior, J., Vanderdonckt, J., Van Roy, P.: A model-based approach for distributed user inter- faces. In: ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computer Systems (EICS 2011), Pisa, 13-16 June 2011
  247. Tandler, P.: The BEACH application model and software framework for synchronous collabora- tion in ubiquitous computing environments. J. Syst. Software (JSS). Special issue on ubiquitous computing, 69 (3), 267-296 (2004) References
  248. Benko, H., Ishak, E., Feiner, S.: Collaborative mixed reality visualization of an archaeological excavation. In: ISMAR '04 Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004)
  249. Benko, H., Ishak, E., Feiner, S.: Cross-dimensional gestural interaction techniques for hybrid immersive environments. In: VR '05 Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Conference 2005, pp. 209-216, IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2005)
  250. Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S., Rein, G.L.: Groupware: some issues and experiences. Commun. ACM 34 (1), 39-58 (1991)
  251. Jefferson, Y.H.: Low-cost multi-touch sensing through frustrated total internal refl ection. In: Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '05), pp. 115-118. ACM, New York (2005)
  252. Peltonen, P., et al.: It's mine, don't touch!: interactions at a large multi-touch display in a city centre. In: CHI '08 Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York (2008)
  253. Sebastián, G., Gallud, J.A. and Tesoriero, R.: A Proposal for an Interface for Service Creation in Mobile Devices Based on Natural Written Language. In. Proceeding of the 5th International Multi-conference on Computing in the Global Information Technology, pp. 232-237. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2010)
  254. Terrenghi, L., Quigley, A., Dix, A.: A taxonomy for and analysis of multi-person-display ecosys- tems. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 13 , 583-598 (2009) References
  255. Johnson-Lenz, Peter and Trudy Johnson-Lenz. 1981. Consider the Groupware: Design and Group Process Impacts on Communication in the Electronic Medium. In Hiltz, S. and Kerr, E. (eds.). Studies of Computer-Mediated Communications Systems: A Synthesis of the Findings, Computerized Conferencing and Communications Center, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, New Jersey (1981)
  256. Crowe, M.K.: Cooperative Work with Multimedia. Springer, Berlin/New York (1994)
  257. Harnad, S.: Distributed processes, distributed cognizes, and collaborative cognition. Pragmat. Cognit. 13 , 501-514 (2005)
  258. Hollan, J.D., Hutchins, E., Kirsh, D.: Distributed cognition:toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction: Special Issue on Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millenium, 7 , 174-196. (2000)
  259. Bharat, K.A., Cardelli, L.: Migratory applications distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of ACM Conference on User Interface Software Technology UIST'95, pp. 133-142. ACM Press, New York (1995). doi: 10.1145/215585.215711
  260. Coutaz, J., Balme, L., Lachenal, C., Barralon, N.: Software infrastructure for distributed migratable user interfaces.In: UbiHCISys Workshop on Ubicomp,in Seattle, Washington, October 2003
  261. González, P., Gallud, J.A., Tesoriero, R.: WallShare: a collaborative multi-pointer system for por- table devices. In: PPD10: Workshop on Coupled Display Visual Interfaces, Rome, 25 May 2010
  262. Vandervelpen, C., Coninx, K.: Towards model-based design support for distributed user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Third Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 61-70. ACM Press, New York (2004)
  263. Tesoriero, R.,Tébar, R.,Gallud, J.A.,Penichet, V.M.R., Lozano, M.: Interactive ecopanels: pan- eles ecológicos interactivos basados en RFID. In: Proceedings of the IX Congreso Internacional de Interacción Persona Ordenador, Albacete, Castilla-La Mancha,Junio 2008, pp. 155-165. ISBN:978-84-691-3871-7
  264. Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.A., Lozano, M.D., Penichet, V.M.R.: A location-aware system using RFID and mobile devices for art Museums. In: Fourth International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems, pp. 76-81. IEEE/CS Press, IARIA-ICAS 2008, Páginas (2008) References
  265. Aarts, E., Harwig, H., Schuurmans, M.: Ambient intelligence. In: Denning, J. (ed.) The Invisible Future, pp. 235-250. McGraw-Hill, New York (2001)
  266. Aarts, E., Marzano, S. (eds.): The New Everyday: Visions of Ambient Intelligence. 010 Publishing, Rotterdam (2003)
  267. Consolvo, S., Roessler, P., Shelton, B.: The CareNet display: lessons learned from an in home evaluation of an ambient display. In: Proceedings of Ubicomp, Nottingham (2004)
  268. Metaxas, G., Metin, B., Schneider, J., Markopoulos, P., de Ruyter, B.: Diarist: aging in place with semantically enriched narratives. In: Proceedings of Interact (2007)
  269. Rowan, J., Mynatt, E.: Digital family portrait fi eld trial: support for aging in place. In: Proceedings of CHI 2005, pp. 521-530. ACM Press, New York (2005), http://www.springer- link.com/content/xw6252054835lrv3/
  270. Dadlani, P., Sinistyn, A., Fontijn, W., Markopoulos, P.: Aurama: caregiver awareness for living independently with an augmented picture frame display. Artif. Intell. Soc. 25 (2), 233-245 (2010)
  271. Dadlani, P., Markopoulos, P., Sinistyn, A., Aarts, E.: Supporting peace of mind and indepen- dent living with the Aurama awareness system. J Ambient Intell Smart Environ (JAISE) 3 (1), 37-50 (2011)
  272. Härmä, A.: Ambient telephony: scenarios and research challenges. In: Proceeding INTERSPEECH 2007, Antwerp, Belgium (2007)
  273. Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, London/New York (1976)
  274. Peregrín, J.E., Dadlani, P., de Ruyter, B., Harma, A.: Ambient telephony: designing a communication system for enhancing social presence in home mediated communication. In: Proceedings of ASCII 2009, IEEE, Amsterdam (2009) References
  275. Dourish, P., Bellotti, V.: Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In: Proceedings of CSCW '92, New York, pp. 107-114 (1992)
  276. Greenberg, S., Gutwin, C., Cockburn, A.: Awareness through fi sheye views in relaxed- WYSIWIS groupware. In: Proceedings of GI '96, Toronto, pp. 28-38 (1996)
  277. Morris, M., Horvitz, E.: SearchTogether: an interface for collaborative web search. In: Proceedings of UIST '07, New York, pp. 3-12 (2007)
  278. Wiltse, H., Nichols, J.: PlayByPlay collaborative web browsing for desktop and mobile devices. In: Proceedings of CHI'09, New York, pp. 1781-1790 (2009)
  279. Whitney, L.: More people grabbing directions via mobile phones. CNET news. http://news. cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20008867-94.html (2010). Accessed 17 June 2011
  280. Keuchler, M., Kunz, A.: CollaBoard: a remote collaboration groupware device featuring an embodiment enriched shared workspace. In: Proceedings of GROUP '10, New York, pp. 211- 214 (2010)
  281. Cao, X., Forlines, C., Balakrishnan, R.: Multi-user interaction using handheld projectors. In: Proceedings of UIST '07, New York, pp. 43-52 (2007)
  282. Hang, A., Rukzio, E., Greaves, A.: Projector phone: a study of using mobile phones with integrated projector for interaction with maps. In: Proceedings of MobileHCI '08, New York, pp. 207-216 (2008)
  283. Ware, C., Lewis, M.: The DragMag image magnifi er. In: Proceedings of CHI '95, New York, pp. 407-408 (1995)
  284. Gustafson, S., Baudisch, P., Gutwin, C., Irani, P.: Wedge: clutter-free visualization of off- screen locations. In: Proceedings of CHI '08, New York, pp. 787-796 (2008)
  285. Alexander, J., Cockburn, A., Fitchett, S., Gutwin, C., Greenberg, S.: Revisiting read wear: analysis, design and evaluation of a footprints scrollbar. In: Proceedings of CHI '09, New York, pp. 1665-1674 (2009)
  286. crises happen, various people with different roles and privi- leges according to their specifi c expertise and function are working together within the process of analyzing, evaluating and deriving counteractive measures. Typically, T. Barth (*) • T. Fielenbach • M. Bourimi • D. Kesdogan Information Systems Institute -IT Security Group , University of Siegen , Hölderlinstr. 3 , 57076 Siegen , Germany e-mail: barth@wiwi.uni-siegen.de ; fi elenbach@wiwi.uni-siegen.de ; bourimi@wiwi.uni-siegen.de ; kesdogan@wiwi.uni-siegen.de P. G. Villanueva ISE Research group, Computing Systems Department , University of Castilla-La Mancha , Av. España S/N. Campus Universitario de Albacete , 02071 Albacete , Spain e-mail: Pedro.Gonzalez@uclm.es References
  287. ReSCUeIT: Robust and secure supply chain supporting IT. http://www.sichere-warenketten.de/ . Accessed 7 June 2011
  288. Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.A.: Multi-pointer and collaborative system for mobile devices. In: Proceeding of Mobile HCI'10, pp. 435-438. ACM, NY, USA (2010)
  289. Camenisch, J., Van Herreweghen, E.: Design and implementation of the idemix anonymous credential system. In: CCS'02: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Washington, DC, pp. 21-30 (2002)
  290. Maybury, M., Wahlster, W.: Readings in Intelligent User Interfaces (Interactive Technologies). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)
  291. Lukosch, S., Bourimi, M.: Towards an enhanced adaptability and usability of web-based collaborative systems. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 17 (4), 467-494 (2008)
  292. Appelt, W., Mambrey, P.: Experiences with the BSCW shared workspace system as the back- bone of a virtual learning environment for students. In: Proceedings of ED-MEDIA99, Seattle (1999)
  293. Bourimi, M., Heupel, M., Kesdogan, D., Fielenbach, T.: Enhancing usability of privacy-respect- ing authentication and authorization in mobile social settings by using idemix. Research paper in the context of the EU FP7 project di.me. 2011. urn:nbn:de:hbz:467-4839. http://dokumentix. ub.uni-siegen.de/opus/volltexte/2011/483/index.html (2011). Accessed 7 June 2011
  294. Bourimi, M., Barth, T., Haake, J.M., Ueberschär, B., Kesdogan, D.: AFFINE for enforcing earlier consideration of NFRs and human factors when building socio-technical systems fol- lowing agile methodologies. In: Proceeding of the 3rd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering (HCSE), Berlin/Heidelberg (2010)

Related papers

Human–Computer Interaction Series AaronnMarcus HCI and User-Experience Design Fast-Forward to the Past, Present, and Future
Ilya Dolzhenkov

HCI is a multidisciplinary fi eld focused on human aspects of the development of computer technology. As computer-based technology becomes increasingly pervasive -not just in developed countries, but worldwide -the need to take a human-centered approach in the design and development of this technology becomes ever more important. For roughly 30 years now, researchers and practitioners in computational and behavioral sciences have worked to identify theory and practice that infl uences the direction of these technologies, and this diverse work makes up the fi eld of human-computer interaction. Broadly speaking it includes the study of what technology might be able to do for people and how people might interact with the technology. The HCI series publishes books that advance the science and technology of developing systems which are both effective and satisfying for people in a wide variety of contexts. Titles focus on theoretical perspectives (such as formal approaches drawn from a variety of behavioral sciences), practical approaches (such as the techniques for effectively integrating user needs in system development), and social issues (such as the determinants of utility, usability and acceptability).

View PDFchevron_right
An agenda for human-computer interaction: science and engineering serving human needs
gary marchionini

1991

View PDFchevron_right
Human-Computer Interaction: Psychological Aspects of the Human Use of Computing
Gary Olson

Annual Review of Psychology, 2003

Human-computer interaction (HCI) is a multidisciplinary field in which psychology and other social sciences unite with computer science and related technical fields with the goal of making computing systems that are both useful and usable. It is a blend of applied and basic research, both drawing from psychological research and contributing new ideas to it. New technologies continuously challenge HCI researchers with new options, as do the demands of new audiences and uses. A variety of usability methods have been developed that draw upon psychological principles. HCI research has expanded beyond its roots in the cognitive processes of individual users to include social and organizational processes involved in computer usage in real environments as well as the use of computers in collaboration. HCI researchers need to be mindful of the longer-term changes brought about by the use of computing in a variety of venues.

View PDFchevron_right
Human-Computer Interaction: Enhancing User Experience in Interactive Systems
Mr. Karun Sanjaya

E3S web of conferences, 2023

Enhancing user experience (UX) in interactive systems requires effective human-computer interaction (HCI). The relationship between people and computers has grown in significance as technology progresses, having an impact on many areas of our life. The main ideas and tactics used in HCI to enhance the user experience in interactive systems are examined in this abstract. Understanding the capabilities and constraints of both humans and computers forms the basis of HCI. HCI researchers and designers may develop interactive systems that complement users' mental models and cognitive processes by researching human behavior, cognition, and psychology. Additionally, taking into account the features of the computer system, such as its responsiveness, processing capacity, and interface design, enables the development of systems that are more userfriendly and effective. As a result, the discipline of human-computer interaction works to improve the user experience in interactive systems. Researchers and designers in the field of human-computer interaction (HCI) can produce interactive systems that are simple, effective, entertaining, and satisfying for users by comprehending human capabilities, applying user-centered design principles, utilizing interactive techniques and interfaces, integrating multimodal interfaces, and embracing emerging technologies. The continued development of HCI will continue to influence and enhance how people use computers, enhancing user experiences and creating new opportunities for interactive systems in the future.

View PDFchevron_right
Exploring human-computer interaction: its issues and challenges
Lowella C Viray

2016

The term human-computer interaction (HCI) is simply the study of people, computer technology, and the ways people and computer technology influence each other. One of the major concerns of professional practitioners in the field of HCI is the design of interactive systems for human use. It aims to determine how these computer technologies become more usable and more receptive to the users’ needs. To provide the best possible computer interface within the given constraints, the HCI designers are supposed to design and develop systems that minimize the barriers between human’s cognitive model of what users want to accomplish and the computer’s understanding of the users’ tasks. As computer use became more widespread, the role of computer and information technologies embellishes an important role in various organizations through utilizing different computer based information systems. As these 21st century technologies will confront us with the complete generations of services, the new generations of computer interfaces must equally have to master the fundamental organizational, societal and technological issues and challenges that will affect the effective use and efficient human-computer interactions design. The key goal of this paper is to be able to explore these issues and challenges that will tremendously affect the design and implementation success of HCI.

View PDFchevron_right

Cited by

Distributed Web browsing: supporting frequent uses and opportunistic requirements
Marco Winckler

Universal Access in the Information Society

Nowadays, the development of Web applications supporting distributed user interfaces (DUI) is straightforward. However, it is still hard to find Web sites supporting this kind of user interaction. Although studies on this field have demonstrated that DUI would improve the user experience, users are not massively empowered to manage these kinds of interactions. In this setting, we propose to move the responsibility of distributing both the UI and user interaction, from the application (a Web application) to the client (the Web browser), giving also rise to inter-application interaction distribution. This paper presents a platform for client-side DUI, built on the foundations of Web augmentation and End User Development. The idea is to empower end users to apply an augmentation layer over existing Web applications, considering both frequent use and opportunistic DUI requirements. In this work, we present the architecture and a prototype tool supporting this approach and illustrate the incorporation of some DUI features through case studies.

View PDFchevron_right
Providing plasticity and redistribution for 3D user interfaces using the D3PART model
Thierry Duval

Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces

We propose D3PART (Dynamic 3D Plastic And Redistribuable Technology), a model to handle redistribution for 3D user interfaces. Redistribution consists in changing the components distribution of an interactive system across different dimensions such as, platform, display and user. Our work is based on previous models for the creation of 3D plastic user interfaces, interactive systems that can handle the context of use modifications while preserving usability. In our previous work, we proposed a task model, a device model and an application component model for the creation of plastic user interfaces that handle the 3D specificities. With D3PART, we extend these models in order to include redistribution capabilities. The final solution lets developers create applications where 3D content and tasks can be automatically redistributed across the different dimensions at runtime. The proposed redistribution process is based on a client-server architecture with a meta-user interface to control the redistri

View PDFchevron_right
Towards Tangible and Distributed UI for Cognitively Impaired People
Ruzalin Galiev

Universal Access in Human–Computer Interaction. Designing Novel Interactions, 2017

Tangible systems are used for cognitively impaired persons to support activation of users' cognitive processes and to facilitate the understanding of according tasks. Motivated by the research results, a combined tangible and distributed user interface was realized by means of which users can navigate through and interact with a web form. The work is based on an existing accessible web form (AWF) that is to be filled out cooperatively by cognitively impaired and by cognitively non-impaired people assisting them. As proof-of-concept, Sifteo cubes were used that enable the user to interact with a system by pressing a cube's display, by tilting, shaking or flipping a cube, or by placing cubes side by side. In terms of an inclusive design the resulting AWF-Cube prototype was developed and evaluated by a user test with cognitively impaired people. They judged the use of the cubes to be simple although some problems were encountered. The results indicate that the participants understood the navigation and interaction concepts and do not have problems in switching their attention between the AWF main interface and the cubes at the right time.

View PDFchevron_right
MIDAS: A Software Framework for Accommodating Heterogeneous Interaction Devices for Cloud Applications
Kangyoon Lim

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2013

Even though the computational power and storing capacities of mobile computing platforms have recently increased dramatically, so have the needs of mobile applications. With the advent of the cloud computing and wireless network technology, the mobile device finds itself as an ideal candidate as a multipurpose interaction client device instead of as a standalone computing station. In the line of such a trend, we present a software framework (called MIDAS) that enables an application to lend itself to many different types of interaction methods (namely, sensing and display) and accommodate users with variant client devices without platform specific coding. The paper discusses the requirements and the design of the software architecture, and in addition, demonstrates its effectiveness with several case studies.

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved