1. Producing an enhanced publication Dennis Adriaansen Jürgen Hooft 1

2. Problem statement Breure et al. in ‘ Rich Internet publications: Show what you tell’, 2010.  “dedicated tools for construction are equally important”  “the required software is generally not yet available as a ready-made toolbox”  “dedicated tool set is still lacking” 2

3. Problem statement Thoma et al. in ‘Interactive publications: creation and usage’, 2006  “lack of suitable open source tools for authoring an interactive publication and for reading or using it”  “easy to use tools with wizard-like interfaces would be necessary to encourage widespread use” 3

4. Problem statement Van den Heuvel et al. in ‘The VeteranTapes: Research corpus, fragment processing tool, and enhanced publications for the e-Humanities’, 2010  “There are clear obstacles for researchers to embrace EPs, extra effort is needed to add research data to a publication” 4

5. Problem statement  Problem is evident  Limits number of EPs  Despite advantages of EPs 5

6. Problem statement Thoma et al., 2006  several benefits over normal publications, by added datasets, photos, video’s animations, etc.  reuse the media content for analysis and presentation and to check the underlying data and possibly derive alternative conclusions van den Heuvel et al., 2010  Due the link between the publication and the research data the publication can be much richer than a paper editions permits 6

7. Research question What is the desirable functionality of an authoring tool for enhanced publications? 1. What types of enhanced publications are available? 2. What tools are currently available for producing an enhanced publication? 3. Are the available tools suitable for the different types of enhanced publications? 7

8. Current state  Verrijkte Publicaties: onderzoeksresultaten in samenhang (SURFfoundation, 2010)  Rich Internet Publications (Breure et al., 2010)  Verkenning van de interesse van wetenschappelijke onderzoekers in WP1-Verrijkte Publicaties en WP2- Collaboratories (van der Poel, 2007)  Report on Enhanced Publications state-of-the-art (Woutersen et al., 2009)  Interactive publications and the record of science (McMahon, 2010)  Interactive publications: creation and usage (Thoma et al., 2006)  Interactive publications: The document as a research tool (Thoma et al., 2010) 8

9. Current available tools  DatapluS: Enhanced Publication Editor  ESCAPE  Forge: designed to streamline the process of adding interactive capability to the media objects by providing an easy and intuitive set of procedures, and where possible, through the use of wizards (Thoma et al., 2010) 9

10. Desirable functionality Thoma et al., 2006  Appearance: paginated view as traditional article  Page transitions  In-page navigation  Image browsing  Navigating to an embedded/linked media object  Native support for interactivity  Execute code  Transmission  Embedding and linking of multimedia/interactive objects  Document integrity and structure. 10

11. Hypothesis  Current tools are not suitable for authoring an enhanced publication.  Time consuming  Lack of functionality  Low ease of use 11 Research method  Literature review

12. Planning  22-12 Overview types of EPs  22-12 Overview current available tools  05-01 Suitable tools  12-01 Desirable functionality  24-01 Paper submission 12

13. Questions Questions? 13