Notes: Interaction reading group: March 15, 2004 Seamfulness paper: Summary: Ubicomp systems, good to support seams in systems when you have different intentions for the software than it was designed for. Cellphones - example with changing cells, some people want to know about the hidden information Good to show the seams or the cracks in the system, and supporting this is a good thing Second Paper: Appologies Brief summary... Discussion: Is there any conflict between Recommender and seamfulness? Why are they linked? Because they seemed interesting, but are 2 sides of the same coin Where are the seams: They are going to be there, between the software apps. look at the difference between desktop and ubicomp systems Extra info should be available, like the phone cell, this is not a flaw, but should be integrated into the software itself Is the cell phone a good or bad example? perhaps it is a good example of looking at ways to control seams But what is a seam? More about the interface than the software itself it seems that users want to see the background information sometimes Vlad, using an example of a car, and being able to see the engine to be able to understand what is wrong putting in cracks on purpose but...what it really says is that we should leverage existing cracks Capializing on the inherent cracks exploring the parameters of the system Can learn new things by working with the system, changing our behaviour can have benifits, but this takes us back to the question of if this is a good change People adapting to situations? new systems require people to adapt is there a percieved benifit to adapting to technology people will adapt if there is a benifit Hidden properties of the system Key message: Assume that ubicomp should be seamless, but this may not be the only way invisibility is good, but it shouldn't stop there. Seamfulness/seamlessness depends on the user Should be adaptable to each user. Making something configurable, you have more variables to deal with and to learn about depends on the task, the devices, Point: conflict between resource providers, and the users, like faith's tablet and browser selection example seamfulness to aid users in manipulating the system(?) grabbing it and changing the use of it. takes time to learn about the seams, have to want to do this or to have the time and the drive Take these factors into account when designing systems... this may have been the intent of the paper, to make these issues apparent to system designers Paper 2: What did we hate about it? Ideas are drawn from wide range of sources Hard to get into - paper is a big lit review and comparison trying to cast a wide net But will use it more for a reference of other work in the area Have to read more to get the idea of the paper...flaw, should explain concepts to the audience Terms are not really clarified,but it doesn't seem to be for us as a peer group Was this paper actually accepted in a conference? Good to have link to full reference, but this is an aside to the talk The paper doesn't really describe the system very well New set of vocabulary that is not obvious...domain specific Lit survey is missing references to agents but it is old, so it may not be that bad. specific to the cscw community there is a lot of overlap - ubicomp, agents, but he doesn't use these Paper 3: On Hyperstructure and Music structure Showing how structure piece of music (tempo, pitch etc) can be used to create hyperstructure or use hyperstructure to create music. Looked at it as a navigable structure rather than static document. Navigating across metadata different way of looking at thing. What do you call the object/end point/target/result/node? Two levels metadata & compasition data Relevent HCI because revealing handles for interaction. Broad musical structure, using hyperstruction to link into and out of music, comparitive between music and text. Where music and text similar and different? What you listen to is a trail? Distinction between user and creater. Music the creater decideds the path. Narative - syntactical rules for both music and text. What can follow where etc. Comparing two structuralist breakdowns. Analysis of a piece rather than creating a piece - doesn't necessarily work both ways. Musical links within the music? Audio linking in audio comparibe to text linking in text. Stewert Goose - Siemans. Lots of work with interface in cars. Audio but not music.