1. Dewan1 Collaborative Applications Prasun Dewan Department of Computer Science University of North Carolina CB 3175 Sitterson Hall Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175 dewan@cs.unc.edu http:/www.cs.unc.edu/~dewan

2. Dewan2 Definition User 1 User 2 Coupling Potentially Real-Time I/O Collaborative Application

3. Dewan3 Traditional Collaborative Applications File save User 1User 2 load Mail Talk send User 2 receive User 1 hi hello User 2User 1 hi hello

4. Dewan4 Traditional Collaborative Applications File save User 1User 2 load Mail send User 2 receive Talk hi hello User 2 User 1 hi hello Implicit Comm. Artifact-based Polling Asynchronous Explicit Comm. Private Messages Auto Notification Asynchronous Implicit Comm. Session-based Auto Notification Synchronous

5. Dewan5 Novel Collaborative Applications Implicit & Explicit Comm. Artifact-based Session-based Synchronous & Asynchronous Session-based Explicit Messages Artifact-based Private Messages Implicit Comm. Artifact-based Session-based Synchronous File++ Mail++ Talk++ File + Mail Talk + Mail File + Mail + Talk Talk + File

6. Dewan6 Talk++ Mail++ File++ Talk + Mail Talk + File Mail + File Talk + Mail + File

7. Dewan7 Talk Screen Division Screen gets divided among two users. Each portion shows history of user’s input. Each user’s input seen incrementally. N-Users?

8. Dewan8 Semi-Synchronous N-User Talk A single history shared by all users User’s input not seen incrementally. Concurrent unseen typing can lead to history misinterpretation User does not know if newly shown text was entered concurrently

9. Dewan9 Horizontal Time Line Long conversations will not fit. Incremental input of users in other threads of conversations distracting Horizontal time line in Flow Chat (Vronay, Smith et al. 99), Users see concurrent input. Time line of committed text for third party Textless box created for uncommitted text

10. Dewan10 Vertical Time Line Comic-book metaphor Incremental input not shown – empty balloon created Does not work for large # users Vertical time line in Freeway (Vronay 2002)

11. Dewan11 Threaded Chat Scales to large # users & supports long conversations New message response to clicked message. Incremental input not shown, but empty box created Chronological order not shown New items gradually fade to grey. Fewer messages, balanced participation, but users less comfortable and same task performance. Overhead of responding to message? Associate default thread with message Structure? Threaded Chat (Smith, Cadiz et al. 2000)

12. Dewan12 Babble Persistent Sessions and Involvement Degree User List Involvement Degree Topic List Current messages dewan wu omojokun sherman CSCW Demo Faculty Retreat Comp 14 From: PD Is the grading sheet ready From: Omojokun About to post it. Bradner et al ‘99 Persistent sessions Social topics synchronous Work topics asynchronous

13. Dewan13 MaryJohn MUDs: Textual Virtual Reality Say Hi everyone Emote smiles Whisper “Boring” to Joe You whisper, “Boring” to Joe @who Name ConnectIdle Time Time John has entered the room (hear footsteps) You say, “Hi everyone” John says, “Hi everyone” You smile John smiles Look John Move John to public place Change John’s description John’s textual description Disallow John whisper Disallow John from this room (Wizard) Make John a wizard

14. Dewan14 Line of Site Graphical VR MUD place represented as 3-D space Users represented as avatars in 3-D space. Line of site communication Move avatars close to users of interest. Can express emotions Avatars in V-Chat (Smith, Farnham et al. 2000)

15. Dewan15 Session DIVE: Aura-based Graphical VR Application User 2 User 1 User 3 User 4 Aura Avatar interaction With another user enables communication With app enables sharing. Transitive Multiple auras Podium - perception and communication. Determine whether can speak into/hear the speaker. Table – perception and distribution. Determine if distributed document is shared or private. Fahlen, Stahl et al ‘93

16. Dewan16 MASSIVE: Aura and Nimbus Speaker’s aura must intersect listener’s nimbus User 2 can hear User 1 User 1 User 2 Aura Nimbus Greenhalgh & Benford 95

17. Dewan17 MASSIVE: Aura and Nimbus Speaker’s aura must intersect listener’s nimbus User 1cannot hear user 2 User 1 User 2 Aura Nimbus Greenhalgh & Benford 95

18. Dewan18 Elvin CofeeBiff: Textual Remote VR # of people in coffee room Scrolling user list. Can get notified when # > threshold (party!)

19. Dewan19 Video Walls: Video-based Remote VR Camera & Microphone Screen & Speaker Camera & Microphone Room 1Room 2 Screen & Speaker

20. Dewan20 Two Remote Rooms Goal: spontaneous collaboration See CNN to attract attention Moderately useful N rooms? Display of two remote kitchens, local image, and video to attract attention (Jancke, Venolia et al. 2001)

21. Dewan21 Media Space Room 2Room 4 Map Selecting a room starts video conference with user Can be abrupt

22. Dewan22 Office Walker Interaction Model (Obata, Sazaki 98) Each office has virtual neighbors Clicking on office places caller in virtual hallway Neighbors can see small image. User can approach to create bigger image. Office worker, neighbors, visitors and initiate talk.

23. Dewan23 Two Remote Rooms Media space/Office Walker intended for 1-1 Connected Kitchens can be used for 1-N Speaker focus? Display of two remote kitchens, local image, and video to attract attention (Jancke, Venolia et al. 2001)

24. Dewan24 Overview + Speaker Omni-directional set of cameras to create overview image. Shot of current speaker sent separately. Speaker can be selected manually by buttons. Auto detection –Speaker’s voice received by his microphone first. –Audio triangulation can be used when each speaker does not have microphone. Custom zooming? –on non speaker or speaker? Overview, speaker and persons selection buttons (Rui, Gupta et al. 2001)

25. Dewan25 3-D Telepresence Multiple cameras used to create 3-D Model of Room Remote site can navigate in this model –With or without tracking –Can focus on speaking person –Or patient! UNC Office of the Future

26. Dewan26 Gesture Cam: Remote Surrogate Can determine which objects to look at –As in office of the future Can point to specific objects –As in Clearboard Figure originally appears in [30]

27. Dewan27 Gesture Cam: Architecture Figure Originally appears in [30]

28. Dewan28 Colab. PsyBench

29. Dewan29 PsyBench

30. Dewan30 Psy Bench Architecture

31. Dewan31 In Touch

32. Dewan32 In Touch Architecture

33. Dewan33 Merging Graphical VR and TelePresence?

34. Dewan34 Mixed reality: Internet Foyer Physical Foyer –Public visiting place Virtual foyer –3-D image visualization of web pages with avatars –Clicking on page opens the page shows 2-d images of people browsing it. Mixed reality –Physical foyer has video wall to 3-D visualization and avatars –Virtual foyer has video of physical foyer Benford ‘95

35. Dewan35 TELEP: Presentation to large # users Display at lecture (left) and remote site (right) (Jancke, Grudin et al. 2000 ) Speaker video Slide Video Lecture SiteRemote Site VideoPicture Text Descrip. Question & Vote Status Text Comm. Scrollable remote audience view Questions seldom asked Local audience not seen remotely

36. Dewan36 Video Production Lecture Same screen for lecture and audience view Switch to speaking audience member as soon as tracked If no one tracked, show overview If lecturer speaking, occasionally show random audience member A shot should be shown for a max and min time. Always show person from the same side. Two consecutive shots should be very different Figure 4: Cameras and their placement (Liu, Rui et al. 2001)

37. Dewan37 Video vs. App. Sharing Screen shot can be shared through video broadcast or app sharing App sharing cheaper, with better fidelity. Allows collaborative input. –E.g. multiple presenters Integrating with video for non- computer objects?

38. Dewan38 TeamWorkstation: Integrated Desktop & Computer Awareness Each user has personal and shared computer Shared computer can provide various overlays (Ishii 90)

39. Dewan39 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy TELE-SCREEN

40. Dewan40 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy TELE-DESK

41. Dewan41 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy SCREEN-OVERLAY

42. Dewan42 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy DESK-OVERLAY

43. Dewan43 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy SCREEN & DESK OVERLAY

44. Dewan44 Editing paper xxxx yyyyy COMPUTER SHARING Computer shared by capturing and distributing video to the monitor Keystrokes also captured and distributed by hardware. Everything overlaid is video No software needed

45. Dewan45 SUMMARY OF MODES (Ishii 90)

46. Dewan46 Awareness of Collaborator Must look away from work area to see collaborators’ image. Do not know what object the collaborator is gazing at. Overlay Video?

47. Dewan47 Clearboard: Collaborator Awareness Figure available from http://ishii.www.media.mit.edu/people/ishii/CB.html.

48. Dewan48 Clearboard: Architecture Figure first appeared in [26] Mirror image transmitted when LCD screen in transparent mode. Video projected when in scattering mode. Digitizer pen used to track user input.

49. Dewan49 Clearboard: Drafter Mirror Figure first appeared in [26] Coupling two non electronic whiteboards. Half-slivered mirror Fluorescent marker See two hand images One captured directly One reflected Polarized film and filter on each camera prevents feedback between screen pairs

50. Dewan50 Two Gaze Awareness Problem Object of interest: Do we know what object on the screen the collaborator is looking at. –Clearboard and Facetop address this. Person of interest: Do we know which one of many collaborators a person is addressing –Hydra, MAJIC address this

51. Dewan51 Hydra: Gaze Awareness Figure originally appears in [5]. Images too small to give good user experience

52. Dewan52 MAJIC: Real-Life with Seamless User Boundaries Figure originally appears in [36] Similar idea in office of the future –From talking head to large (projected images) –Gives more of a feeling of being there –Solving different problems

53. Dewan53 Talk: Being there vs. beyond Being there –“Real-time” communication –Peripheral awareness Footsteps, hallway –Moods –Aura –Nimbus –Video –Remote view control –Remote pointing –Haptics –Human access control –Podium, sharing documents in a table Beyond being there –Teleporting to room –Whispering not noticed by those not included –Aura and nimbus customizable –Anonymity, Presence Control –Multitasking –Involvement degree and conversation status –Talk history –Threads & structuring conversations –Computer controls –Asynchronous collaboration

54. Dewan54 Anonymity In theory participants can be more bold In an experiment perceived status did no harm (Davis, Zaner 2002)

55. Dewan55 Presence Control Presence –Location –In-use computers –Activities Computer and other TELEP Presence Options –Video, photo, text Users liked not sending video Collaborator is often required to poll for presence in meeting (Mark, Grudin ’99) Moral: give control

56. Dewan56 Multitasking Reduced commitment to meeting and less engaged (Mark, Grudin et al. 99). But may be willing to attend more meetings! –TELEP: Teachers more willing to cover elementary stuff knowing advanced students can tune out (S. A. White, A. Gupta et al. 2000)

57. Dewan57 Meeting video browsing (Li, Gupta et al. 2000)

58. Dewan58 Video Processing: Pauses in speech and associated video removed. Time compress without changing pitch Table of contents generated manually. Shot boundaries generated by detecting transitions Bookmark and annotate Jump to next/previous –Bookmark –Shot Boundary –Slide transition –Time boundary Application of pause/removal, rime compression –Sports video & Lectures –Upto 147 % playback speed –Not TV dramas! Shot boundaries –Sports programs (high variation in content) –Not lectures (Li, Gupta et al. 2000)

59. Dewan59 Automatic Slide Summaries Allocate time at beginning proportional to slide time –Slide time proportional to slide importance –Important things explained at beginning Include higher-pitch information –Pitch increases when excited Both techniques found equally good and acceptable. Not as good as author- generated summaries (He, Sanocki et al. 1999)

60. Dewan60 Other Slide-based Summarization Techniques Slides only Slides + text transcript of audio Slides + text transcript + points in author- generated A/V summary highlighted High information density –All three methods as good as author- generated A/V summaries Low information density –Highlighted as good as author-generated A/V summaries (He, Sanocki et al. 2000)

61. Dewan61 Chat History Issues People hardly use history. –Some of you did. Hard to scroll back and forth. –Designed for passive text –Chat is active text being changed under you. Snap-back scrolling –In Flow Chat –Scrolling takes us back in time –Releasing scrollbar returns to present –Can be used for any history-based tool

62. Dewan62 Elvin Ticker-Tape History with TimeOut colab:vibhor: merging of vector workscolab:pd: Great! Give demo sometime. User Name GroupTimeout pd Great! Give demo sometime. colab5 mins. Fitzptarick et al’ 99

63. Dewan63 Scripted Collaboration (Farnham, Chesley et al. 2000) Computer acts as moderator –Determines issues discussed and allocated time After using it rules enforced manually.

64. Dewan64 rIBIS: Real-time Structured Issue Resolution *I: Which processor should be used ?P: Processor A AS: Fast *P: Processor B AS: Cheap, already in use -P: Processor C AS: Cheap & fast AO: Will not be available in time Resolved issue Unresolved position Argument Supporting Rejected position Argument objecting Rein & Ellis ‘91 Current position

65. Dewan65 Implicit structure for status Messages automatically classified into comments, questions, responses. Based on presence of ? Statistics shown about them. Threaded Chat (Smith, Cadiz et al. 2000)

66. Dewan66 CLARE: Structured Discussion + Process Model Structured discussion a la IBIS (RESRA - Representation Schema of Research Artifacts) –paper is source –addressing some problem –about which a claim can be made –supported by evidence –generated by research methods –defining concepts Process model (SECAI ) –Summarization (Privately create RESRA) –Evaluation (Private critique it) –Comparison (Publicly compare them) –Argumentation (Publicly critique them) –Integrate (The various RESRAs)

67. Dewan67 RESRA Figure originally appears in [39]

68. Dewan68 SECAI Figure originally appears in [39]

69. Dewan69 Mail++ Talk++ Mail++ File++ Talk + Mail Talk + File Mail + File Talk + Mail + File

70. Dewan70 Threaded Email Messages shown chronologically Special lines created to show parent-child relationship Messages grouped by day – today, yesterday Groups messages, gives context Useful after vacation Thread-based commands –Delete thread –Forward messages and subscriptions (Venolia, Dabbish et al.)

71. Dewan71 Prioritizing mail messages (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

72. Dewan72 Prioritizing mail messages Automatically prioritize mail messages based on –organizational relationship to sender –proximity of send time to key times for sender –message length and body –how long message waiting (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

73. Dewan73 Messages to mobile device Goal: cause minimal disruption. If user not active > T & message priority > P –Send to mobile device P function of –Whether user in meeting. Determined from calendar –Other factors. Replace –“Not active > T” with –“Likely to be away > T” (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

74. Dewan74 Messages to mobile device (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

75. Dewan75 Presence Forecast Determine when mobile user is likely to return to office and remain there for some time –e.g. probability of user returning within 15 minutes and remaining for 30 minutes Based on – activity with desktop –patterns of past behavior aggregate lunch, morning, afternoon, evening, night behavior –how long user has been away

76. Dewan76 Presence Forecast (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002) p(Client activity within 15 min. | time away, time of day) Probability of return within 15min Time away Night Morning Evening Lunch Afternoon All

77. Dewan77 SMART OOF (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

78. Dewan78 SMART OOF (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

79. Dewan79 SMART OOF SMOOF: Smart out of office message If message priority is > threshold send presence estimate (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

80. Dewan80 Time Wave Office Presence forecast –Updated continuously based on how long user has been away (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

81. Dewan81 Time Wave (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

82. Dewan82 Time Wave Email review forecast –Updated continuously based on prev. email history (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

83. Dewan83

84. Dewan84 Time Wave Cost of interruption forecast, associated with –time of day, free period (Horvitz, Koch et al. 2002)

85. Dewan85

86. Dewan86 Coordinate Multi Device System Track user activity on multiple devices Forecast which devices accessible Useful because –devices may imply location –caller knows to send email or call mobile phone –capabilities required by caller may be device specific certain devices allow video conferencing

87. Dewan87 Other forecasts Based on user activity, data, and input can determine –whether a person will attend a meeting calendar meeting duration running vs. one-time meeting invitation specific or to group

88. Dewan88 Information Lens: Typed Messages Subject: …. Type: Exam Change Notice Semi-structured typed messages Messages NoticesRequests Room Change Notice Exam Change Notice Exam Change Request Class Absence Request Type Hierarchy Joe Absence 14 Exam Change Type-based filtering Notices Malone ‘87

89. Dewan89 Coordinator: Structured Conversation Customer Producer Request (response, completion, alert dates) Acknowledge Agree Interim-Report/Cancel/New-Promise Report-Completion Satisfaction Automation of form fields alerts, reminders status information CustomerProducer RequestAgree Satisfaction Complete Flores et al 88

90. Dewan90 Action Workflow Status By Candidate Workflow Step Manage Review Director Manager Director Manager 2 Schedule Interview 14 3 Director Manager Declare Assessment 9 8 10 7 Manager Technical Directors Submit Evaluation Form 5 6 Medina Mora ‘92

91. Dewan91 ATOMICMAIL: Computational Mail Data Program Mail Receiver display/animate graphics gather data and mail Lisp-based PL Single Directory Accessed File Creation Limited Mail Messages Limited Borenstein ‘92

92. Dewan92 File++ Talk++ Mail++ File++ Mail + File Talk + Mail Talk + File Talk + Mail + File

93. Dewan93 State of the art file system Access control Locking Versioning Disconnected access –Hoarding “caching” data needed in disconnected access –Directory merging on connection Adds composed Deletes cancel. File granularity –Programmer-defined merge procedure Local area network

94. Dewan94 Application-level Support Disconnected access and merging of –Calendars –Address book –Word –Powerpoint –Not Excel.

95. Dewan95 rep. schedule Lotus Notes: P2P Database Replication “Replica” source determines destination determines read access delete replication old data replication replication schedule write access type replication record replication ACL rep. rep. param. rep. immediate rep. Table & record- based merging

96. Dewan96 Groove Workspace Groove workspace –Wide-area replicated storage Like Lotus Notes but with a file-system like UI –Replicas merged on connection time As in Lotus Notes –Intuitive access control based on making and accepting invitations.

97. Dewan97 Chronicle: Fine-grained Spreadsheet Versions Named Range –Unit of naming, storage, versioning –Rectangular cell block –Range name –User-defined annotation –User id –Date Compose named ranges –Sally’s expense data + Joe’s sales data Try different alternatives of named range –Sally’s expense forecast –Joe’s expense forecast Ranges can be browsed, mailed Concurrent editing of named range automatically creates versions

98. Dewan98 Mail + File Talk++ Mail++ File++ Mail + File Talk + Mail Talk + File Talk + Mail + File

99. Dewan99 Mail + File Version system ala multiple mail copies. Editing sent file –before mail receipt –after mail receipt –allows users to have own file name spaces, easy access control Sending access permissions via mai –a la groove invitations Sending same file to a group of users –creates a single copy of file on accessible shared (sharepoint) site

100. Dewan100 News Like file, logically centralized information shared among multiple users. As in mail, users view/modify information by receiving/sending/responding to messages.

101. Dewan101 Message M Message 1 Message 2 SendReceive User 2 User 1 User N User 1 User N News: Shared Mailboxes

102. Dewan102 Scaleable Modifiable Information Wide area shared information. Scales to the whole world. Cannot build such a file system. How can we build News? –Loose consistency as in Notes and Groove!

103. Dewan103 News: Scaleable Architecture News Client eventual delivery of immutable messages in possibly different order post news News Server exchange news read news

104. Dewan104 Message/News Filtering Agent-based –Newsgroup –Discussion Thread –Urgent Message –Sender Cost –Contents of Messages (Data Mining) Rating-based –Moderator –Known Reviewers –Anonymous Similar Reviewers

105. Dewan105 Group Lens: Aggregate-based Filtering Multiple (arbitrary) people rate message Rating combined into one aggregate number specific to reader Correlation coefficient - CAB: – Sum (i = 1 to n) ((Ai - Amean)* (Bi - Bmean)) – --------------------------------------------- – Sqrt ( (Sum (i = 1 to n) (Ai - Amean)**2) * Sum (i = 1 to n) (Bi - Bmean)**2)) Given set S of rating users, aggregate : –Sum (i = 1 to n) (Bi - Bmean)*CABi –-------------------------------------- + Amean –Sum (I = 1 to n) CABi

106. Dewan106 News: Scaleable Architecture News Client How should this architecture be modified? post news News Server exchange news read news

107. Dewan107 Group Lens Architecture News Client News Server post news read news Better Bit Bureau send rating post rating Modified News Client get rating read rating

108. Dewan108 Getting Ratings & Other Apps Incentive to review? Implicit review –Track amt of read time Other apps –Books Buying is strong endorsement –Movies –People? Multi-dimensional I like his reliability but you care about his creativity

109. Dewan109 Adding Agent-based Filters Spell checker –Rating inversely based on % misspelled words Included messages –Rating inversely based on % included text Length –Rating inversely based on message length Agent is another user giving ratings! –Can find correlation with an agent

110. Dewan110 Adding Filters News Client News Server post news read news Better Bit Bureau send rating post rating Modified News Client get rating read rating Filterbot (Rating Agent) read news send rating Only filterbots agreeing with user used in ratings!

111. Dewan111 Adding Filters Sarwar, Konstan et al 98

112. Dewan112 Evaluating Aggregation-based Filtering Coverage –Measures % of time predictions are available before an item is rated by user Based on a minimum # of ratings available from sufficiently close neighbors Decision Support Accuracy –Probability random “good” item rejected by system –Probability random “bad” item accepted by system –Good vs bad 4,5 vs 1,2,3

113. Dewan113 Experiments Coverage, Decision Making Accuracy

114. Dewan114 Experiment Conclusions Net.general –Filters hardly helped Perl.misc –Spell helps a lot –Others help somewhat Linux.Announce –Length and spell help Recipes –Spell checking helps Humor –All factors but length help Spell helps Included messages –Must be right amount Length useful in announcements

115. Dewan115 Annotated Files Discussions are like news –Shared among n users –Author name evident They are associated with shared objects UI for adding discussions –Hypermedia vs. columnar UI

116. Dewan116 POLITeam: Shared Workflow Documents Workflow –Structured mailing of documents. Breaking workflow –Received document can be shared with others

117. Dewan117 PREP: Zero-Cost Hyperlinks Main textAlice’s comments Benu’s comments Chou’s comments Para 1 Para 2

118. Dewan118 Quilt: Writeable Typed Hypermedia Revisions Suggestions Public comments Private messages Other Document Creation time Creator Logging Machine Level (Insert-Char) User- Level (Reorganized Section 2) Roles Reader < Commenter < Co-Author Triggers Alert significant changes Colab Styles Author modifies owned section Co-author modifies all Designated editor modifies all Artifact = Document + Colab. Info. Fish. Kraut et al ‘88 In SharePoint now

119. Dewan119 Annotation Granularity Whole document –Links to threaded discussion about it. –Good for making broad comments preferred by readers –Directly transferred from hard copies Parts of document –Anchors to part of the document. –Difficult to implement –Do not require reproducing document part being commented. –Good for detailed comments. In theory at least. (Brush, Bargeron et al.)

120. Dewan120 Office 2000 Variable Granularity Annotations (Cadiz, Gupta et al. 2000)

121. Dewan121 Office 2000 Study Specification Drafts rather than Completed Documents Ten month period. 20 annotations per person. Large fraction stopped after first annotation –Orphan annotations losing context a reason Users do not make high-level comments –Author would not get it Or nitpicky ones such as spelling, language –Other readers not interested in them. Use other channels when immediate communication required –Cannot assume notification subscription (Cadiz, Gupta et al. 2000)

122. Dewan122 Orphan Annotations Arise when fragment to which anchored is deleted. Office 2000 attaches them to the whole document. –Not ideal if no longer relevant More sophisticated algorithm: –Save deleted fragment. –Find new matching fragment Cut words from back and front and do match. Stop when < 15 chars to avoid false positive. Users liked it when the differences between old and matched text was small but not large. –Did not work well all the time Could match keywords instead of whole text. Could do an intelligent diff as in PREP –Neuwirth, Chandok 92 Brush, Bargeron et al 2001

123. Dewan123 Live Annotations? Nitpicky comments entered as edits. –Special annotation right and view like read right and view in Office Shown as a track change. User can accept the underlying script. Akin to calendar invitations –Email desired changes to shared artifact Dual: –Automatically email/notify actual changes to shared artifact

124. Dewan124 Automatic Notifications Content not given Changer does not know if manual email needed

125. Dewan125 Descriptive Notifications Actual comment given. Link to thread. Commenter knows subscriptions.

126. Dewan126 Mercury: Automatic In-Place Notification module A export T type T = char User 1 Module B import T v: T = ‘a’ User 2 Edit T Asynchronous Error notification Buffered Notifications module A export T type T = String

127. Dewan127 Subscription Mechanism (Cadiz, Gupta et al. 2000)

128. Dewan128 Subscription Specifications Enrique: Whenever any document is created inform him about it. Alice & Benu: Whenever any document is created inform them about it. Alice & Benu: When any document they own is modified, send them an event Chou & Dimitri: When any circulation document they have processed changes stations, send this event to them

129. Dewan129 GroupDesk: Automatic Customizable Awareness Notification Relations: Editor Events: Modification Interested Users: Alice, Benu Relation ClassesObject ClassesEvent Classes WorksOn Document Modification Editor Object Comment Added can establish can raise Interest Context

130. Dewan130 Event Semantics Interest context associated with object classes Relations implicitly defined by system –Currently active user. –Document creator When an event occurs on object: –For each interest context: If event is subclass of specified event field –Send event to all interested users who have the specified relation with the object Example 2: –Object Class: CirculationDocument –Interest Context Relation: HasProcessed Event: ChangesStation Users: Chou, Dimitri Example 2: –Object Class: Document –Interest Context Relation: * Event: Created Users: Enrique –Inherited by CirculationDocument

131. Dewan131 Disruption caused by notifications Czerwinski, Cutrell et al 2000 For complex tasks –No problems For simple tasks –Performance went down Automatic prioritization useful Polling vs. notifications? –Grudin 94: Managers who with staff polled calendar continuously found notifications nuisance

132. Dewan132 Side Show (Cadiz, Venolia et al. 02)

133. Dewan133 Side Show (Cadiz, Venolia et al. 02)

134. Dewan134 SideShow & Peripheral Awareness Three level of awareness –In sideshow sidebar –In document from where ticket is moved. –By hovering on sidebar Can be used for any information source –Person –Weather map –Web page

135. Dewan135 Side Show: Person Aawareness (Cadiz, Venolia et al. 02)

136. Dewan136

137. Dewan137

138. Dewan138

139. Dewan139

140. Dewan140

141. Dewan141 Talk + File Talk++ Mail++ File++ Talk + File Talk + Mail Mail + File Talk + Mail + File

142. Dewan142 RTCAL: Real-Time Artifact Sharing Application Commands Regular User Chair Conference Control Commands join, leave get floor, release floor, terminate Application Commands Proposal: 10am Vote: Yes Proposal: 10am Vote: No Public Appts Private Appts Public Appts Topic, Participants Chair, Controller Awareness

143. Dewan143 Scroll Wars User scrolling to see some pvt appointment causes “scroll wars”

144. Dewan144 GROVE: Access-Controlled Views Outline Title 1. Readable and writeable item 1.1 Also readable and writeable *.Shared readable and writeable *.* Shared readable User 2User 3User 4 Outline Title 1.Readable and writeable item 1.1 Also readable and writeable 1.2 Another public item *.* Different shared item User 1User 3User 4 User 1User 2 Independent Scrolling Incremental Sharing No Concurrency Control User and State Awareness Fine-grained Access Control public, shared, private read, write rights

145. Dewan145 Cognoter (Stefik et al ’85) Groove – cannot scroll independently Keep pvt and public information in separate windows. –Drag and drop or commit to make public a la IM –Now scroll wars only occur in public window –Ability to scroll together or separately Can also change scrolling mode in Groove Process model in shared window –Brainstorming – add items (ideas) to shared window –Organizing – collect ideas into alternatives –Evaluation – discuss and delete alternatives –Analogous to SEPIA process model.

146. Dewan146 Aspects Concurrency Control Groove – user working independently must manually enforce CC Free for all –Paragraph-level locking –Adjacent bar gives lock status Black for locker, grey for others Medium mediation –A pen passing mechanism ala Groove/NetMeeting Full mediation –Moderator passes pen –Conference starter is moderator

147. Dewan147 Interactive Lock Probelms Overhead in locking & unlocking –If explicit commands needed –GroupDraw – selecting/unselecting  lock/unlock May forget to unlock

148. Dewan148 Central Host Host 1 Host 2 CES: Delayed Commitment & Tickle Locks Document Root Text Node Owner User 1 Text Node Owner User 2 Distributed Document Nodes Implicit Commit Del/CR to unlock items Tickle Locks (Timed out)

149. Dewan149 Locking Delay Might need to go to remote site to determine if lock available –Assuming lock information is not replicated –Replication requires addressing consistency problems

150. Dewan150 GroupDraw: Virtual Gestures & Optimistic Locks User 2 Implicit Locking/Unlocking Optimistic Locking Fine-grained CC & AC Uncoupled Scrollbars & Palettes Coupled Graphical Objects User 1 Multiuser Scrollbar & Gestalt Viewer

151. Dewan151 Independent Drawing Modes GroupDraw allows users to select drawing mode independently What happens in single display groupware? Pebbles –Mobile computer as input device –Shared screen is output device

152. Dewan152 Pebbles: Single-Display Groupware * + TelepointerUser Identifier Drawing Mode

153. Dewan153 Ensemble GroupDraw and Pebbles: pointer exported to all. Ensemble: selectively import and export telepointers. Implicit Session Management: editing same file puts users in same session. Locked objects: changes not broadcast.

154. Dewan154 Talk + Mail + File Talk++ Mail++ File++ Talk + Mail Talk + File Mail + File Talk + Mail + File

155. Dewan155 IRI: Distance Learning Environment Figure available at http://www.cs.odu.edu/~tele/iri.