1© Simon Buckingham Shum
Hypermedia Discourse:Theory & Technology for the Pragmatic Web?
Simon Buckingham Shum
Knowledge Media Institute & Computing Research CentreThe Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
kmi.open.ac.uk/people/[email protected]
SRI International, AI Centre, 5 May 2007
Web
Hypermedia
Pragmatics
Discourse
2© Simon Buckingham Shum
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
Compendium Project:Compendium Project:
Al Al Selvin Selvin ((Verizon/Open Verizon/Open U.)U.)Maarten Maarten Sierhuis Sierhuis (NASA)(NASA)Jeff Conklin (Jeff Conklin (CogNexus CogNexus Inst.)Inst.)Michelle Michelle Bachler Bachler (Open U.)(Open U.)
Funding gratefullyFunding gratefullyacknowledged:acknowledged:
Scholarly Scholarly Ontologies Ontologies Project:Project:
Victoria UrenVictoria UrenGangmin Gangmin LiLiClara ManciniClara ManciniNeil BennNeil BennBertrand Bertrand SerenoSerenoJohn John DomingueDomingueEnrico MottaEnrico Motta
3© Simon Buckingham Shum
web pragmatics?web pragmatics?
the Pragmatic Web?the Pragmatic Web?
pragmatic webs?pragmatic webs?
“THE PRAGMATIC WEB CONFERENCE is a unique forum toenvision and debate how the emerging social, semantic,multimedia Web mediates the ways in which we construct sharedmeaning. While there is much research and development intotopics relevant to this challenge such as collaboration, usability,knowledge representation, and social informatics, the PragmaticWeb conference provides common ground for dialogue at thenexus of these topics.”
4© Simon Buckingham Shum
WhatWhat is theis the interestinterestin thein the
““Pragmatic WebPragmatic Web””??
COMMITMENT / ACTIONHow do we support the
expression, and coordination,of commitments over the Web?
CONTEXTWhen contexts change,
meanings change inconversations, documents, andmodels of the world. How doesthis shape our use for formal
semantics on the Web?
CONVERSATIONThis is how trust is built, andthings get done. How do we
do this fluently over the web?
5© Simon Buckingham Shum
Pragmatic Web research challengesPragmatic Web research challenges
——from the ICPWfrom the ICPW’’07 07 CfPCfP: www.: www.PragmaticWebPragmaticWeb.info.info
How can we better understand the usefulness, andlimitations, of a concept such as "Web Pragmatics”
What pragmatic design principles improve websiteswhere trust and commitment to action are central?
What are the tradeoffs for users of more structured Webcollaboration media? (e.g. in learnability, scaleability,intelligibility)
How can participatory work practices and collaborationtools be orchestrated in the design of the standards, datamodels and ontologies that underpin data-driven Webapplications?
6© Simon Buckingham Shum
Pragmatic Web research challengesPragmatic Web research challenges
What role does pragmatics play in the design ofpersonalised information and personalised actionschannelled through the Web?
What impact (intended or unintended, productive ordisruptive) do different levels of computationalinfrastructure have on Web pragmatics?
How can we clarify our understandings of increasinglyimportant concepts on the Web such as "social ties","metadata", "knowledge representation", and"transaction"?
If "context" is pivotal in making human interactionmeaningful, how can we take context into account toimprove Web applications?
7© Simon Buckingham Shum
Web
The essence of this talk:The essence of this talk:
Hypermedia
Pragmatics
Discourse
8© Simon Buckingham Shum
Web
The essence of this talk:The essence of this talk:
Hypermedia
Pragmatics
Discourse:-)
9© Simon Buckingham Shum
Modelling Modelling ~ Discourse~ Discourse
The discourse of modelling:
How can we support the discoursethat drives the development andcontextualisation of the models
underpinning interactive systems?
Modelling discourse:
Can we usefully model(structure) sensemakingdiscourse, without in theprocess obstructing it?
10© Simon Buckingham Shum
DiscourseVerbal and written workplace communicationDiscourse communities: “making and taking perspectives”DialogueArgumentationClaim makingAnalytical narrativeMeetings
11© Simon Buckingham Shum
HypermediaModelling discourse relationsExpressing different perspectives on a conceptual spaceSupporting the incremental formalization of ideasRendering structural visualizationsConnecting heterogeneous content
12© Simon Buckingham Shum
Notation(s)
IntuitiveUser Interface
ComputationalServices
Literacy/Fluency
DiscourseOntology
Characteristics of Hypermedia DiscourseCharacteristics of Hypermedia Discourse
13© Simon Buckingham Shum
2 examples of Hypermedia Discourse2 examples of Hypermedia Discourseapproach and tool supportapproach and tool support
CompendiumCompendium
•• personal or grouppersonal or groupconcept mappingconcept mapping
•• real time meetingreal time meetingcapturecapture
•• participatory modellingparticipatory modelling•• discourse as semanticdiscourse as semantic
hypertexthypertext
ScholarlyScholarlyOntologiesOntologiesProjectProject
•• Web publishing ofWeb publishing ofscholarly claims andscholarly claims andargumentationargumentation
•• discourse as discourse as semanticsemantichypertexthypertext
14© Simon Buckingham Shum
CompendiumCompendium
•• personal or grouppersonal or groupconcept mappingconcept mapping
•• real time meetingreal time meetingcapturecapture
•• participatory modellingparticipatory modelling•• discourse as semanticdiscourse as semantic
hypertexthypertext
15© Simon Buckingham Shum
• Shared visual display• Simple notation• Template patterns• Node transclusions• Tagging• Hypermedia• Interoperability with
other data, servicesand user interfaces
Key elements of CompendiumKey elements of Compendium
Practitioner skillse.g. • Cognitive skills to chunk and link ideas
(Buckingham Shum)
• Dialogue Mapping (Conklin)
• Conversational Modelling (Sierhuis & Selvin)
• Participatory Hypermedia Construction(Selvin)
ModellingFrameworkse.g. • IBIS• CommonKADS• World Modelling• Critical Systems Heuristics
KnowledgeMedia
16© Simon Buckingham Shum
Discourse grounded in Horst Discourse grounded in Horst RittelRittel’’s s IBIS:IBIS:Issue-Based Information SystemIssue-Based Information System
17© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium: hypertext discourseCompendium: hypertext discoursemapping/conceptual modellingmapping/conceptual modelling
18© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium: Descendent of Compendium: Descendent of gIBISgIBIS
19© Simon Buckingham Shum
Structure management in CompendiumStructure management in Compendium
Associative linkingnodes in a shared context connected by graphical Map links
Categorical membershipnodes in different contexts connected by common attributes via metadata Tags
Hypertextual Transclusionreuse of the same node in different views
Templatesreuse of the same structure in different views
HTML, XML and RDF data exports for interoperability
Java and SQL interfaces to add services
20© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium as the technical andCompendium as the technical andintellectual intellectual ‘‘glueglue’’
Java/RDF
Advanced Knowledge Technologies project: www.aktors.org
21© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium as Compendium as sensemaking sensemaking hub forhub foremergency response semantic web toolsemergency response semantic web tools
Advanced Knowledge Technologies project: www.aktors.org
22© Simon Buckingham Shum
Modelling Modelling using Issue-templatesusing Issue-templates
23© Simon Buckingham Shum
Modelling organisational processes inModelling organisational processes inCompendium using a Compendium using a TemplateTemplate
24© Simon Buckingham Shum
Completing a Compendium templateCompleting a Compendium template
25© Simon Buckingham Shum
GeneratingGeneratingCustomCustomDocuments andDocuments andDiagrams fromDiagrams fromCompendiumCompendiumTemplatesTemplates
Build
Assignable
Inventory
Assignable
Inventory
Deviations/
Changes
(Engr Sched)
Approvals
Integrated/
Revised
Requirements
Field
Specific
Assignments
/Assignment
List
Installation
Details/
Specs/NDO
Assignable
Inventory
Notice (E1)
26© Simon Buckingham Shum
Collaborative Ontology Design and Mergingwith Compendium
Buckingham Shum, S., Buckingham Shum, S., MottaMotta, E. and , E. and DomingueDomingue, J. (2002). Augmenting Design Deliberation with Compendium:, J. (2002). Augmenting Design Deliberation with Compendium:The Case of Collaborative Ontology Design. in The Case of Collaborative Ontology Design. in Workshop on Facilitating Hypertext-Augmented CollaborativeWorkshop on Facilitating Hypertext-Augmented CollaborativeModellingModelling, ACM Hypertext Conference, ACM Hypertext Conference. [. [PrePrintPrePrint: http:: http://cognexus//cognexus.org/ht02]..org/ht02].
27© Simon Buckingham Shum
Setup for collaborative ontology designSetup for collaborative ontology designand rationaleand rationale capturecapture
28© Simon Buckingham Shum
Result of initialResult of initialrequirements discussionrequirements discussion
29© Simon Buckingham Shum
Dialogue MappingDialogue Mapping informal discussion informal discussion
30© Simon Buckingham Shum
‘‘Home windowHome window’’ of ofthe emergingthe emergingontology, linking toontology, linking todesign discussionsdesign discussions
31© Simon Buckingham Shum
Template-driven Template-driven ConversationalConversationalModellingModelling of ontology class/slot structureof ontology class/slot structure
32© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using Compendium for personnelUsing Compendium for personnelrecovery planningrecovery planning
Co-OPR Project (with Austin Tate):http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/co-opr
33© Simon Buckingham Shum
Co-OPR Co-OPR –– Sample Screens Sample Screens
Left screen: Compendiumintelligence database and
discussion/rationalecapture.
Middle screen: I-X ProcessPanels showing current
state of plan execution andsituation map
Right screen: I-X ProcessPanels communicating
with the external world,e.g. Isolated Personnel
34© Simon Buckingham Shum
Co-OPR: Operational SensemakingCo-OPR: Operational Sensemaking
COA generation
Operational Sensemakingsupport for JPRC
COAcomparison/evaluation
COA refinement
Situation analysis
OtherTools +
DetailedPlanning
35© Simon Buckingham Shum
Co-OPR Scenario InformationCo-OPR Scenario Information
36© Simon Buckingham Shum
PR Doctrine for Situation AnalysisPR Doctrine for Situation Analysisextracted as an Issue Templateextracted as an Issue Template
Link to the sourcedoctrine document
Issues that requireattention (asspecified in thedoctrine document)
Relevant extractfrom doctrinepublication insidethe node forreference
37© Simon Buckingham Shum
Completed Issue Template Completed Issue Template (1/2)(1/2)
38© Simon Buckingham Shum
Completed Issue Template Completed Issue Template (2/2)(2/2)
Compendium knowledgeelements (nodes) can beoverlaid on any image, andcan point to any media file
39© Simon Buckingham Shum
Example ONA database mapsExample ONA database maps
Maps ofmultimedia datafrom the ONA db
Response MechanismForce data convertedto Issue template by
drag+drop from Excelspreadsheet
40© Simon Buckingham Shum
Imported database on Blue ForcesImported database on Blue Forces
41© Simon Buckingham Shum
JPRC Compendium HomepageJPRC Compendium Homepage
Sensemaking workflow: Links start from JTFC Briefing, touse of ONA database, to initial COA exploration, toworksheet analysis, to a COA Comparison worksheet forfinal briefing back to JTFC
42© Simon Buckingham Shum
Issue Templates for JTFC BriefingIssue Templates for JTFC Briefing
The JTFC’s Briefing iscaptured in a set of issuetemplates
For each category (menuitem on left) there are anumber of issues awaitinganswers
43© Simon Buckingham Shum
JTFC Briefing: JTFC Briefing: Intent Intent templatetemplate
Answers to template issuesprovided in the JTFC Briefing.Answers may be constrained
by predefined options, asspecified in the XML schema
44© Simon Buckingham Shum
Crisis Action Planning Crisis Action Planning templatetemplatebuilt in an hourbuilt in an hour
Followingdistribution of the
Crisis ActionPlanning processwhich was to befollowed, a CAP
template wascreated at short
notice to supportthe process
45© Simon Buckingham Shum
COA COA Wargame Wargame Analysis WorksheetAnalysis Worksheet
Constraints raised bythe JTFC are
‘docked’ here asvisual reminders
Links to the SituationAnalysis and COA
Comparisonworksheet
Rows for recording critical events whichprovoke discussion
Actors
Key Issues from PRDoctrine are listed here
46© Simon Buckingham Shum
PMESII and Relative Superiority IssuePMESII and Relative Superiority IssuePalettesPalettes
The high level Issues can beexpanded if required to seethe sub-Issues raised by PR
doctrine
47© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium Compendium Wargame Wargame AnalysisAnalysisWorksheetWorksheet
The discussion map‘behind’ the cell is then
built on the fly
Input from PMESII analystsintegrated into the discussion map
An argument map isdragged from the
template when someaspect of the COA
provokes discussion
48© Simon Buckingham Shum
COA-2.1 COA-2.1 Wargaming Wargaming WorksheetWorksheet (2/2) (2/2)
Dialogue Mapcapturing the
planners’discussion of this
option
49© Simon Buckingham Shum
COA Comparison WorksheetCOA Comparison WorksheetSummary of how COAs trade off against each other
Constraints
DoctrinalIssues can
also bedisplayed if
required
50© Simon Buckingham Shum
Grey Matter and SiliconGrey Matter and SiliconI-X Inputs to CompendiumI-X Inputs to Compendium
• Issues and Responses• Activity Options• Constraints/Maps• Annotations/Notes
51© Simon Buckingham Shum
Independent evaluation of Co-OPRIndependent evaluation of Co-OPR
Evaluation ratings from six members of the planning cell who were supported by Co-OPR tools inthe personnel recovery simulation. (Numbers indicate the number of planners assigning the rating.)
52© Simon Buckingham Shum
Independent evaluation of Co-OPRIndependent evaluation of Co-OPR
In the subsequent vignette of the scenario (in which Co-OPR was not due to participate) Compendiumwas requested to replace (the usual) PowerPoint as the information management tool.
53© Simon Buckingham Shum
Large scale NASA Large scale NASA e-science e-science field trials:field trials:
Interoperability with other databases,Interoperability with other databases,software agents and collaboration toolssoftware agents and collaboration tools
Clancey, W.J., Sierhuis, M., Alena, R., Berrios, D., Dowding, J., Graham, J.S., Tyree, K.S.,Hirsh, R.L., Garry, W.B., Semple, A., Buckingham Shum, S.J., Shadbolt, N. and Rupert, S.(2005). “Automating CapCom Using Mobile Agents and Robotic Assistants.” 1st
Space Exploration Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 31 Jan-1 Feb, 2005, Orlando, FL. Available from: AIAA Meeting Papers on Disc [CD-ROM]: Reston,VA, and as Advanced Knowledge Technologies ePrint 375: http://eprints.aktors.org/375
54© Simon Buckingham Shum Image Credits--- Mars: NASA/JPL/MSSS; Earth: NASA/JSC; Composite: MSSS
55© Simon Buckingham Shum
NASA NASA e-science e-science field trials field trials (2004 and 2005)(2004 and 2005)
Distributed Mars-Earth planning and data analysis toolsfor Mars Habitat field trial in Utah desert, supported from US+UK
56© Simon Buckingham Shum
NASA Mobile AgentsNASA Mobile Agents ArchitectureArchitecture
57© Simon Buckingham Shum
Collaboration ConfigurationCollaboration Configuration
Scientist(Mars)
Scientist(Earth)
Scientist(Earth)
Scientist(Mars)
Scientist(Earth)
Software AgentArchitecture
(Mars)
Compendium used as a collaboration medium at allCompendium used as a collaboration medium at allintersections: intersections: humans+agents, reading+writinghumans+agents, reading+writing maps maps
58© Simon Buckingham Shum
NASA NASA testbedtestbed::Compendium activity plans for surface exploration, constructed byCompendium activity plans for surface exploration, constructed byscientists on scientists on ‘‘EarthEarth’’, interpreted by , interpreted by software agents on software agents on ‘‘MarsMars’’
The Compendium nodes and relationships in this plan were interpreted by Brahms softwareagents for monitoring and coordinating astronaut and robot activity during surface explorations.
Copyright, 2004,RIACS/NASA Ames,Open University,SouthamptonUniversityNot to be usedwithout permission
59© Simon Buckingham Shum
CoAKTinG CoAKTinG NASA NASA testbedtestbed::Compendium science data map, generated by Compendium science data map, generated by software agentssoftware agents, for, forinterpretation by interpretation by Mars+Earth scientistsMars+Earth scientists
The Compendium maps were autonomously created and populated with science data by Brahms software agentsthat use models of the mission plan, work process, data flow and science data relationships to create the maps.
Copyright, 2004,RIACS/NASA Ames,Open University,SouthamptonUniversityNot to be usedwithout permission
60© Simon Buckingham Shum
CoAKTinG CoAKTinG NASA NASA testbedtestbed::Compendium-based photo analysis by Compendium-based photo analysis by geologistsgeologists on on ‘‘MarsMars’’
Copyright, 2004,RIACS/NASA Ames,Open University,SouthamptonUniversityNot to be usedwithout permission
61© Simon Buckingham Shum
NASA NASA testbedtestbed::Compendium scientific feedback map Compendium scientific feedback map from Earth scientists to Marsfrom Earth scientists to Marscolleaguescolleagues
Copyright, 2004,RIACS/NASA Ames,Open University,SouthamptonUniversityNot to be usedwithout permission
62© Simon Buckingham Shum
Importing an Argumentation Scheme asImporting an Argumentation Scheme asan IBIS templatean IBIS template
compendium.open.ac.uk/openlearn
63© Simon Buckingham Shum
Importing an Argumentation Scheme asImporting an Argumentation Scheme asan IBIS templatean IBIS template
compendium.open.ac.uk/openlearn
64© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using Compendium to mapUsing Compendium to mapand automatically indexand automatically index
replayable replayable video conferencesvideo conferences
CoAKTinG Project: www.aktors.org/coakting
Memetic Project: www.memetic-vre.net
65© Simon Buckingham Shum
Collaborative Collaborative sensemaking sensemaking in in e-Sciencee-Science::Meeting Replay tool Meeting Replay tool for Earth scientists, synchronisingvideo of Mars crew’s discussion as they annotate their mission plans as they annotate their mission plans
Copyright, 2004,RIACS/NASA Ames,Open University,Southampton UniversityNot to be used withoutpermission
NASA MR Clip: 00:50
66© Simon Buckingham Shum
Memetic Memetic Meeting ReplayMeeting ReplayThe The CoAKTinG CoAKTinG projectproject’’s results are now mainstreamed in thes results are now mainstreamed in theAccess Grid by the JISC Access Grid by the JISC Memetic Memetic VRE projectVRE project
67© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium Compendium ‘‘literacyliteracy’’??
…understanding how to write, read,talk and think in hypermedia IBIS
…approaches from consultancy inthe field, and video analysis in the
lab…
68© Simon Buckingham Shum
Literacy: significant user communityLiteracy: significant user communitywww.www.CompendiumInstituteCompendiumInstitute.org.org
69© Simon Buckingham Shum
Literacy: Cognitive task analysisLiteracy: Cognitive task analysis
Cognitive tasks involved in using a graphicalargumentation scheme (Buckingham Shum 1996)
Affordances of graphical DR for coordinatinggroup design (Buckingham Shum et al 1997)
70© Simon Buckingham Shum
Literacy: the craft skill of IBIS mapping inLiteracy: the craft skill of IBIS mapping inmeetings: meetings: ““Dialogue MappingDialogue Mapping””
Jeff Conklin:CogNexus Institute:www.CogNexus.org
71© Simon Buckingham Shum
Literacy: expertise analysisLiteracy: expertise analysis(Albert (Albert SelvinSelvin))
What is the nature of expert human performance increating and modifying real time conceptual structuresfor groups?
The NASA knowledge mapper role: Listening and interpreting Intervening in ‘normal’ conversation flow Getting validation for captured material
Building hypertext representations onthe fly
Interrelating data and objects Adding metadata Software-specific skills
Conventionalfacilitationskills
Knowledgemediafacilitationskills
Aesthetic and Ethical Implications of Participatory Hypermedia Practice: First Year ReportSelvin, A. (2005), Technical Report KMI-05-17, Knowledge Media Institute, Open University, UK
72© Simon Buckingham Shum
Compendium literacy: expertise analysisCompendium literacy: expertise analysisSelvin Selvin 20052005
Practitioner stancesPractitioner stances
The position of the practitioner with regard tothe current activity: Knowledge Navigator Facilitator Participant Technical Expert Editor
73© Simon Buckingham Shum
Will scientific publishing in 2020 still depend solely on thereading, writing, and discovery of written texts?
What might a more network-centric complement look like?
ScholarlyScholarlyOntologiesOntologiesProjectProject
•• Web publishing ofWeb publishing ofscholarly claims andscholarly claims andargumentationargumentation
•• discourse as discourse as semanticsemantichypertexthypertext
74© Simon Buckingham Shum
In GutenbergIn Gutenberg’’s shadows shadow(or standing on his shoulders)(or standing on his shoulders)
Philosophical Transactions ofthe Royal Society of LondonMarch 1665
Le Journal desSçavansJanuary 1665
Newspapers + Invisible Colleges = Scholarly Journals
75© Simon Buckingham Shum
What if we could get search results like this?What if we could get search results like this?……““What is the Turing Debate?What is the Turing Debate?””
One of seven maps in the Mapping Great Debates: Can Computers Think? Series.MacroVU Press. www.macrovu.com (Horn, 2003; Yoshimi, 2006)
76© Simon Buckingham Shum
Horn (zoomed in)Horn (zoomed in)
MacroVU Press. www.macrovu.com
77© Simon Buckingham Shum
“The Scent of a Site: A System forAnalyzing and Predicting InformationScent, Usage, and Usability of a WebSite”
Web User Flow byInformation Scent(WUFIS)
“Informationforaging”
Informationforagingtheory
Information scentmodels
People try to maximisetheir rate of gaininginformation
?
extends
Going beyond citationsGoing beyond citations……
78© Simon Buckingham Shum
Combining formal relations with theCombining formal relations with theexpressive freedom of expressive freedom of ‘‘folksonomiesfolksonomies’’Relational classes and dialects (KMi Scholarly Relational classes and dialects (KMi Scholarly Ontologies Ontologies project)project)
79© Simon Buckingham Shum
If we model concepts in a literature as conceptIf we model concepts in a literature as conceptmapsmaps…… ((KMiKMi’’s ClaiMappers ClaiMapper, built on Compendium), built on Compendium)
80© Simon Buckingham Shum
““Semantic del.Semantic del.icioicio.us.us””: : KMiKMi’’s ClaimSpotters ClaimSpotter assigning assigning andand linking freeform tags linking freeform tags
Sereno, B., Buckingham Shum, S. and Motta, E. (2007). Formalization, User Strategy and Interaction Design: Users’ Behaviour with Discourse TaggingSemantics. Workshop on Social and Collaborative Construction of Structured Knowledge, 16th Int. World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2007), Banff, 8-12May 2007. http://www2007.org/workshops/paper_30.pdf
81© Simon Buckingham Shum
““Semantic Semantic Google Google ScholarScholar”” KMiKMi’’s ClaimFinders ClaimFinder
82© Simon Buckingham Shum
Visualising claims and argumentsVisualising claims and arguments
ClaimFinder prototype:claimfinder.open.ac.uk
When multipleanalysts annotate webdocuments via aserver, they cangenerate a sharedview of how they seethe field, and wherethey agree/disagree
83© Simon Buckingham Shum
““What papers contrast with this paper?What papers contrast with this paper?””
1. Extract concepts for this document2. Trace concepts on which they build3. Trace concepts challenging this set4. Show root documents
84© Simon Buckingham Shum
Focusing on a conceptFocusing on a conceptincoming+outgoing linksincoming+outgoing links
85© Simon Buckingham Shum
““Semantic Semantic Google Google ScholarScholar”” KMiKMi’’s ClaimFinders ClaimFinder
86© Simon Buckingham Shum
Lineage Lineage tree tree (the roots of a concept)(the roots of a concept)
87© Simon Buckingham Shum
Indicators of Indicators of ClaiMaker ClaiMaker literacy?literacy?expert user makesexpert user makes more extensive use of more extensive use of ClaimakerClaimaker’’s s semanticsemanticstructures in interrogating the network than novicesstructures in interrogating the network than novices
Victoria Uren, Simon Buckingham Shum, Michelle Bachler, Gary Li, (2006) Sensemaking Tools for Understanding ResearchLiteratures: Design, Implementation and User Evaluation. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, Vol.64, 5, (420-445).
88© Simon Buckingham Shum
Some answers to our questionsSome answers to our questions……Web
Hypermedia
Pragmatics
DiscourseThe discourse of modelling:
Compendium+IBIS can support manyforms of discourse and rationalecapture throughout the design
lifecycle, from early requirementsthrough to maintenance
Modelling discourse:
It is possible to co-evolve discourseschemes, tools and literacy to mediate
sensemaking discourse. Strong evidence forCompendium, emerging evidence for
ClaiMaker
89© Simon Buckingham Shum
Notation(s)
IntuitiveUser Interface
ComputationalServices
Literacy/Fluency
DiscourseOntology
Hypermedia Discourse tools:Hypermedia Discourse tools:
90© Simon Buckingham Shum
Common GroundCommon Ground between Pragmatic Web between Pragmatic Weband Hypermedia Discourse perspectivesand Hypermedia Discourse perspectives
supporting human-human & human-agentcommunication
empoweringstakeholdersto negotiate
meaning
co-evolving newskillsets with
new tools
negotiatingmeaning Notation(s)
IntuitiveUser Interface
ComputationalServices
Literacy/Fluency
DiscourseOntology
augmenting collective
sensemaking
91© Simon Buckingham Shum
Ongoing workOngoing work……
92© Simon Buckingham Shum
Social Social bookmarking bookmarking as as semiosissemiosis
Mancini, C. and Buckingham Shum, S.J. (2006). Modelling Discourse in Contested Domains: A Semiotic andCognitive Framework. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64, (11), pp.1154-1171
93© Simon Buckingham Shum
Annotation as Annotation as semiosis semiosis in the Scholarlyin the ScholarlyOntologies Ontologies projectproject
Mancini, C. and Buckingham Shum, S.J. (2006). Modelling Discourse in Contested Domains: A Semiotic andCognitive Framework. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64, (11), pp.1154-1171
94© Simon Buckingham Shum
Making primary and secondary claims asMaking primary and secondary claims assemiotic and discourse movessemiotic and discourse moves
Primary claim:a semiotic move
Secondary claim: a discourse connective
Mancini, C. and Buckingham Shum, S.J. (2006). Modelling Discourse in Contested Domains: A Semiotic andCognitive Framework. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64, (11), pp.1154-1171
95© Simon Buckingham Shum
Combining formal relations with theCombining formal relations with theexpressive freedom of expressive freedom of ‘‘folksonomiesfolksonomies’’Relational classes and dialects (KMi Scholarly Relational classes and dialects (KMi Scholarly Ontologies Ontologies project)project)
96© Simon Buckingham Shum
source type comparativenesspolarity
Mancini, C. and Buckingham Shum, S.J. (2006). Modelling Discourse in Contested Domains: A Semiotic andCognitive Framework. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64, (11), pp.1154-1171
Cognitive Coherence Relations
97© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using CCR-based Coherence Patterns toUsing CCR-based Coherence Patterns todetect candidate detect candidate ““schools of thoughtschools of thought””Doctoral work by Neil Benn, KMiDoctoral work by Neil Benn, KMi
98© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using CCR-based Coherence Patterns toUsing CCR-based Coherence Patterns todetect candidate detect candidate ““schools of thoughtschools of thought””Doctoral work by Neil Benn, KMiDoctoral work by Neil Benn, KMi
99© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using CCR-based Coherence Patterns toUsing CCR-based Coherence Patterns todetect candidate detect candidate ““schools of thoughtschools of thought””Doctoral work by Neil Benn, KMiDoctoral work by Neil Benn, KMi
100© Simon Buckingham Shum
Using CCR-based Coherence Patterns toUsing CCR-based Coherence Patterns todetect candidate detect candidate ““schools of thoughtschools of thought””Doctoral work by Neil Benn, KMiDoctoral work by Neil Benn, KMi
101© Simon Buckingham Shum
Hypermedia Discourse Project:http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/hyperdiscourse