Enabling End User Development through Mashups: Requirements, Abstractions and Innovation Toolkits

  • Cinzia Cappiello
  • Florian Daniel
  • Maristella Matera
  • Matteo Picozzi
  • Michael Weiss
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6654)


The development of modern Web 2.0 applications is increasingly characterized by the involvement of end users with typically limited programming skills. In particular, an emerging practice is the development of web mashups, i.e., applications based on the composition of contents and functions that are accessible via the Web. In this article, we try to explain the ingredients that are needed for end users to become mashup developers, namely adequatemashup tools and lightweight development processes, leveraging on the users’ capability to innovate. We also describe our own solution, the DashMash platform, an example of end-user-oriented mashup platform that tries to fill the gaps that typically prevent end users from fully exploiting the mashup potential as innovation instruments. DashMash offers an intelligible, easy-to-use composition paradigm that enables even inexperienced users to compose own mashups. As confirmed by a user-centric experiment, its paradigm is effective and increases the satisfaction of the end users.


Web Mashups End User Development User-driven Innovation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Balasubramaniam, S., Lewis, G.A., Simanta, S., Smith, D.B.: Situated Software: Concepts, Motivation, Technology, and the Future. IEEE Software, 50–55 (November-December 2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barbagallo, D., Cappiello, C., Francalanci, C., Matera, M.: A reputation-based DSS: the INTEREST approach. In: Proc. of ENTER 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bottoni, P., Costabile, M.F., Levialdi, S., Matera, M., Mussio, P.: Principled Design of Visual Languages for Interaction. In: Proc. of VL 2000, pp. 145–155. IEEE CS, Los Alamitos (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burnett, M., Cook, C., Rothermel, G.: End-User Software Engineering. C ACM 47(9), 53–58 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cappiello, C., Daniel, F., Matera, M.: A Quality Model for Mashup Components. In: Gaedke, M., Grossniklaus, M., Díaz, O. (eds.) ICWE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5648, pp. 236–250. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cappiello, C., Matera, M., Picozzi, M., Sprega, G., Barbagallo, D., Francalanci, C.: DashMash: a Mashup Environment for End User Development. Tech. Rep. (March 2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Costabile, M.F., Mussio, P., Parasiliti Provenza, L., Piccinno, A.: Supporting End Users to Be Co-designers of Their Tools. In: Pipek, V., Rosson, M.B., de Ruyter, B., Wulf, V. (eds.) IS-EUD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5435, pp. 70–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daniel, F., Casati, F., Benatallah, B., Shan, M.-C.: Hosted Universal Composition: Models, Languages and Infrastructure in MashArt. In: Laender, A.H.F., Castano, S., Dayal, U., Casati, F., de Oliveira, J.P.M. (eds.) ER 2009. LNCS, vol. 5829, pp. 428–443. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Angeli, A., Namoun, A., Nestler, T.: End User Requirements for the Composable Web. In: Daniel, F., Facca, F.M. (eds.) ICWE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6385, pp. 396–407. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fischer, G.: End-user Development and Meta-Design: Foundations for Cultures of Participation. In: Pipek, V., Rosson, M.B., de Ruyter, B., Wulf, V. (eds.) IS-EUD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5435, pp. 3–14. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fischer, G.: Beyond Binary Choices: Understanding and Exploiting Trade-Offs to Enhance Creativity. First Monday 11 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hughes, T.P.: The evolution of large technological systems. In: Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P., Pinch, T.J. (eds.) The Social Construction of Technology Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, pp. 51–82. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hornbæk, K.: Current practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64(2), 79–102 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iyer, B., Davenport, T.H.: Reverse Engineering Google’s Innovation Machine. Harvard Busines Review 86(4), 58–69Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jhingran, A.: Enterprise information mashups: integrating information, simply. In: Proceedings of VLDB 2006, pp. 3–4 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maula, M., Keil, T., Salmenkaita, J.-P.: Open Innovation in System Innovation Contexts. In: Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, ch. 12, pp. 249–257 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mehandjiev, N., Lecue, F., Wajid, U., Namoun, A.: Assisted Service Composition for End-Users. In: Proc. of ECOWS 2010, Ayia Napa, Cyprus, pp. 131–138. IEEE CS, Los Alamitos (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Obrenovic, Z., Gasevic, D.: Mashing Up Oil and Water: Combining Heterogeneous Service for Diverse Users. IEEE Internet Computing, 56–64 (November/December 2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ogrinz, M.: Mashup Patterns: Designs and Examples for the Modern Enterprise. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    OMA. EMML Documentation. Technical report, Open Mashup Alliance (December 2010),
  21. 21.
    Picozzi, M., Rodolfi, M., Cappiello, C., Matera, M.: Quality-based Recommendations for Mashup Composition. In: Daniel, F., Facca, F.M. (eds.) ICWE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6385, pp. 360–371. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roy Chowdhury, S., Rodríguez, C., Daniel, F., Casati, F.: Wisdom-Aware Computing: On the Interactive Recommendation of Composition Knowledge. In: Proceedings of WESOA 2010. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sabbouh, M., Higginson, J., Semy, S., Gagne, D.: Web mashup scripting language. In: Proceedings of WWW 2007, pp. 1305–1306 (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    von Hippel, E.: Democratizing Innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. Weiss, Gangadharan, G.R.: Modeling the Mashup Ecosystem: Structure and Growth. R&D Management (2009) (accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wong, J., Hong, J.I.: Making Mashups with Marmite: towards end-user Programming for the Web. In: Proc. of CHI 2007, pp. 1435–1444 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yu, J., Benatallah, B., Saint-Paul, R., Casati, F., Daniel, F., Matera, M.: A Framework for Rapid Integration of Presentation Components. In: Proc. of WWW 2007, pp. 923–932 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cinzia Cappiello
    • 1
  • Florian Daniel
    • 2
  • Maristella Matera
    • 1
  • Matteo Picozzi
    • 1
  • Michael Weiss
    • 3
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Elettronica e InformazionePolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly
  2. 2.University of TrentoTrentoItaly
  3. 3.Carleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations