Advertisement

User-Centered Design of Geographic Interactive Applications: From High-Level Specification to Code Generation, from Prototypes to Better Specifications

  • Christophe MarquesuzaàEmail author
  • Patrick Etcheverry
  • Sébastien Laborie
  • Thierry Nodenot
  • The Nhan Luong
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10140)

Abstract

This paper deals with models and tools allowing designers of geographic web application to focus on the design work rather than on the related coding problems. The contributions of this paper are a specific design model and its associated design environement. The proposed design model is composed of elements that can be translated, through transformation model technics, into executable source code taking into account high-level specifications of the designers. This automated code generation property offers a design approach based on short cycles where designers may adjust their specifications until the generated application matches their requirements. To facilitate this process, the proposed model has been integrated into a graphical web-based environment allowing designers to visually express their specifications and then to generate and to execute the specified application.

Keywords

Visual design Geographic web application design Short lifecycle Code generation 

References

  1. 1.
    Hewett, T.T., Baecker, R., Card, S., Carey, T., Gasen, J., Mantei, M., Perlman, G., Strong, G., Verplank, W.: ACM SIGCHI Curricula for Human-computer Interaction. Technical report. ACM, New York (1992). ISBN:0-89791-474-0. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2594128
  2. 2.
    Bass, L., Faneuf, R., Little, R., Mayer, N., Pellegrino, B., Reed, S., Seacord, R., Sheppard, S., Szczur, M.R.: A metamodel for the runtime architecture of an interactive system: the UIMS tool developers workshop. SIGCHI Bull. 24(1), 32–37 (1992). ACM. ISSN:0736-6906. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=142401
  3. 3.
    Albinola, M., Baresi, L., Carcano, M., Guinea, S.: Mashlight: a lightweight mashup framework for everyone. In: 2nd Workshop on Mashups, Enterprise Mashups and Lightweight Composition on the Web (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Altinel, M., Brown, P., Cline, S., Kartha, R., Louie, E., Markl, V., Mau, L., Ng, Y.-H., Simmen, D., Singh, A.: Damia - a data mashup fabric for intranet applications. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 1370–1373 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angelaccio, M., Krek, A., D’Ambrogio, A.: A model-driven approach for designing adaptive web GIS interfaces. In: Popovich, V., Claramunt, C., Schrenk, M., Korolenko, K. (eds.) Information Fusion and Geographic Information Systems. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pp. 137–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Avagliano, G., Di Martino, S., Ferrucci, F., Paolino, L., Sebillo, M., Tortora, G., Vitiello, G.: Embedding google maps APIs into WebRatio for the automatic generation of web GIS applications. In: Sebillo, M., Vitiello, G., Schaefer, G. (eds.) VISUAL 2008. LNCS, vol. 5188, pp. 259–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barbier, F.: Supporting the UML state machine diagrams at runtime. In: Schieferdecker, I., Hartman, A. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5095, pp. 338–348. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Basin, D.A., Clavel, M., Egea, M., de Dios, M.A.G., Dania, C.: A model-driven methodology for developing secure data-management applications. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 40(4), 324–337 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bolin, M., Webber, M., Rha, P., Wilson, T., Miller, R.C.: Automation and customization of rendered web pages. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), pp. 163–172 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brambilla, M., Fraternali, P.: Large-scale model-driven engineering of web user interaction: the WebML and WebRatio experience. Sci. Comput. Program. 89(Part B), 71–87 (2014). Special Issue on Success Stories in Model Driven EngineeringCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Britts, S.: Dialog management in interactive systems: a comparative survey. Sci. Comput. Program. 18(3), 30–42 (1987)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Busch, M., Ángel García de Dios, M.: ActionUWE: transformation of UWE to ActionGUI models. Technical report, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Partners: LMU and IMDEA. NESSoS, Project (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Caffiau, S., Girard, P., Guittet, L., Scapin, D.L.: Hierarchical structure: a step for jointly designing interactive software dialog and task model. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5611, pp. 664–673. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02577-8_73 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A.: The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, 1st edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1983)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ceri, S., Fraternali, P., Bongio, A.: Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing web sites. Computer Networks 33(1–6), 137–157 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Churcher, G.E., Atwell, E.S., Souter, C.: Dialogue management systems: a survey and overview. Technical report, School of Computer Science, University of Leeds (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coutaz, J.: PAC, on object oriented model for dialog design. In: Interact 1987, pp. 431–436 (1987)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Di Martino, S., Ferrucci, F., McArdle, G., Petillo, G.: Automatic generation of an adaptive WebGIS. In: Carswell, J., Fotheringham, A., McArdle, G. (eds.) W2GIS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5886, pp. 171–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Diaper, D., Stanton, N.: The Handbook of Task Analysis for Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dragicevic, P., Fekete, J.-D.: Support for input adaptability in the ICON toolkit. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, ICMI 2004, pp. 212–219. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ennals, R., Garofalakis, M.: Mashmaker: mashups for the masses. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 1116–1118 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Etcheverry, P., Laborie, S., Marquesuzaà, C., Nodenot, T., Luong, T.N.: Conception d’applications web géographiques guidée par les contenus et les usages: cadre méthodologique et opérationnalisation avec l’environnement WINDMash. J. d’Interaction Personne-Système 3(1), 1–42 (2015). https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01162916v1
  23. 23.
    Gamboa, F., Scapin, D.: Editing MAD* task descriptions for specifying user interfaces, at both semantic and presentation levels. In: Proceedings of Fourth International Workshop on Design, Specification, and Verification of Interactive Systems, pp. 193–208 (1997)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giese, M., Mistrzyk, T., Pfau, A., Szwillus, G., Detten, M.: Amboss: a task modeling approach for safety-critical systems. In: Forbrig, P., Paternò, F. (eds.) HCSE/TAMODIA-2008. LNCS, vol. 5247, pp. 98–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Green, M.: A survey of three dialogue models. Comput. Netw. 5, 244–275 (1986)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guerrero-Garcia, J., Gonzalez-Calleros, J.M., Vanderdonckt, J., Munoz-Arteaga, J.: A theoretical survey of user interface description languages: preliminary results. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Latin American Web Congress, LA-WEB 2009, pp. 36–43. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Haklay, M., Singleton, A., Parker, C.: Web mapping 2.0: the neogeography of the geoweb. Comput. Netw. 2(6), 2011–2039 (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Harel, D., Marelly, R.: Come, Let’s Play: Scenario-Based Programming Using LSC’s and the Play-Engine. Springer-Verlag, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hix, D., Hartson, H.R.: Developing User Interfaces: Ensuring Usability Through Product & Process. Wiley, Chichester (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Huynh, D.F., Karger, D.R., Miller, R.C.: Exhibit: lightweight structured data publishing. In: Proceedings of the 16th International World Wide Web Conference, pp. 737–746 (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Huynh, D.F., Mazzocchi, S., Karger, D.R.: Piggy bank: experience the semantic web inside your web browser. In: Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), pp. 413–430 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koch, N., Knapp, A., Zhang, G., Baumeister, H.: UML-based web engineering. In: Rossi, G., Pastor, O., Schwabe, D., Olsina, L. (eds.) Web Engineering: Modelling and Implementing Web Applications. HCI, pp. 157–191. Springer, London (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kohler, H.-J., Nickel, U., Niereand, J., Zandorf, A.: Using UML as visual programming language. Technical report tr-ri-99-205 (1999)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kolski, C.: Analyse et conception de l’IHM: Tome 1. Interaction homme-machine pour les SI, Hermès (2001)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Krasner, G.E., Pope, S.T.: A cookbook for using the model-view controller user interface paradigm in smalltalk-80. Comput. Netw. 1, 26–49 (1988)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Limbourg, Q., Vanderdonckt, J., USIXML: a user interface description language supporting multiple levels of independence. In: ICWE Workshops, pp. 325–338 (2004)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Loustau, P., Nodenot, T., Gaio, M.: Design principles and first educational experiments of PIIR, a platform to infer geo-referenced itineraries from travel stories. Int. J. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 6, 23–29 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Luong, T.N.: End-user centered modeling applied to interactive geographic application design: an approach based on contents and uses. Modélisation centrée utilisateur final appliquée à la conception d’applications interactives en géographie: une démarche basée sur les contenus et les usages. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Luong, T.N., Etcheverry, P., Marquesuzaà, C.: An interaction model and a framework dedicated to web-based geographic applications. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems, MEDES 2011, pp. 235–242. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Luong, T.N., Etcheverry, P., Marquesuzaà, C., Nodenot, T.: A visual programming language for designing interactions embedded in web-based geographic applications. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI 2012, pp. 207–216. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Luong, T.N., Etcheverry, P., Nodenot, T., Marquesuzaà, C.: WIND: an interaction lightweight programming model for geographical web applications. In: Bocher, E., Neteler, M. (eds.) Geospatial Free and Open Source Software in the 21st Century. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pp. 211–225. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Luong, T.N., Etcheverry, P., Nodenot, T., Marquesuzaà, C., Lopistéguy, P.: End-user visual design of web-based interactive applications making use of geographical information: the WINDMash approach. In: Fifth European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, pp. 536–541 (2010)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Luong, T.N., Laborie, S., Nodenot, T.: A framework with tools for designing web-based geographic applications. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Document Engineering, DocEng 2011, pp. 33–42. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Luong, T.N., Marquesuzaà, C., Etcheverry, P., Nodenot, T., Laborie, S.: Facilitating the design, evaluation process of web-based geographic applications: a case study with WINDMash. In: Proceedings of Second International Conference on Future Data and Security Engineering, FDSE 2015, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 23–25 November 2015, pp. 259–271 (2015)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mahfoudhi, A., Abed, M., Tabary, D.: From the formal specifications of user tasks to the automatic generation of the HCI specifications. In: Blandford, A., Vanderdonckt, J., Gray, P. (eds.) HCI 2001 and IHM 2001, pp. 331–347. Springer, London (2001)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Marion, C.: What is interaction design and what does it mean to information designers? (1999). http://mysite.verizon.net/resnx4g7/PCD/WhatIsInteractionDesign.html
  47. 47.
    Meliá, S., Gómez, J., Pérez, S., Díaz, O.: A model-driven development for GWT-based rich internet applications with OOH4RIA. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Eighth International Conference on Web Engineering, ICWE 2008, pp. 13–23. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2008)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mori, G., Paterno, F., Santoro, C.: Design and development of multidevice user interfaces through multiple logical descriptions. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 30, 507–520 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Normand, V., Siroco, L.M.: de la spécification conceptuelle des interfaces utilisateur à leur réalisation. Ph.D. thesis, Thèse de doctorat Informatique préparée au Laboratoire de Génie Informatique (IMAG), Université Joseph Fourier 258 pages (1992)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ormerod, T.C., Shepherd, A.: Using Task Analysis for Information Requirements Specification: The SGT Method, pp. 1–24. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (2004)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Paillas, V.: Intérêt des applications “WIND” pour l’exploitation pédagogique de textes décrivant des itinéraires: les pratiques d’annotation au service du lire et interpréter différents langages. Master EFE - 2I2N - FEN de l’Université Toulouse 2 (IUFM Toulouse) (2011)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pallota, V.: Computational dialogue models. Technical Report Report IM2.MDM-02, Faculty of Computer and Communication Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology - Lausanne (2003)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Paternò, F., Mancini, C., Meniconi, S.: Concurtasktrees: a diagrammatic notation for specifying task models. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC13 Interantional Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, INTERACT 1997, pp. 362–369. Chapman & Hall Ltd., London (1997)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pfaff, G.E. (ed.): User Interface Management Systems. Springer-Verlag, New York (1985)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Reiß, D., Rumpe, B.: Using lightweight activity diagrams for modeling and generation ofweb information systems. In: Mayr, H., Kop, C., Liddle, S., Ginige, A. (eds.) Information Systems: Methods, Models, and Applications. LNBIP, vol. 137, pp. 61–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Preece, J.: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd edn. Wiley, Chichester (2011)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sallaberry, C., Royer, A., Loustau, P., Gaio, M., Joliveau, T.: GeoStream: spatial information indexing within textual documents supported by a dynamically parameterized web service. In: Proceedings of the International Opensource Geospatial Research Symposium, OGRS 2009 (2009). http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/45/19/49/PDF/ogrs.pdf
  58. 58.
    Samaan, K., Tarpin-Bernard, F.: Task models and interaction models in a multiple user interfaces generation process. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Task Models and Diagrams, TAMODIA 2004, pp. 137–144. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Scapin, D., Pierret-Goldbreich, C.: Towards a method for task description: MAD. In: Berlinguet, L., Berthelette, D. (eds.) WWU 1989, pp. 27–34. Elsevier Science, North-Holland (1989)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Schwinger, W., Retschitzegger, W., Schauerhuber, A., Kappel, G., Wimmer, M., Prll, B., Cachero, C., Casteleyn, S., Troyer, O.D., Fraternali, P., Garrigs, I., Garzotto, F., Ginige, A., Houben, G.-J., Koch, N., Moreno, N., Pastor, O., Paolini, P., Pelechano, V., Rossi, G., Schwabe, D., Tisi, M., Vallecillo, A., van der Sluijs, K., Zhang, G.: A survey on web modeling approaches for ubiquitous web applications. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 4(3), 234–305 (2008)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Sears, A., Jacko, J.A. (eds.): The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications, 2nd edn., September 2007Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Silva, P.P.D.: User interface declarative models and development environments: a survey. In: Palanque, P., Paternò, F. (eds.) DSV-IS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1946, pp. 207–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Tarby, J.-C., Barthet, M.-F.: The DIANE+ method. In: Vanderdonckt, J. (ed.) CADUI, pp. 95–120. Presses Universitaires de Namur (1996)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Veer, G.C.V.D., Lenting, B.F., Bergevoet, B.A.J.: GTA: groupware task analysis - modeling complexity. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 91, 297–322 (1996)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Vuillemot, R., Rumpler, B.: A web-based interface to design information visualization. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Emergent Digital EcoSystems, MEDES 2009, pp. 26:172–26:179. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wong, J., Hong, J.I.: Making mashups with marmite: towards end-user programming for the web. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), pp. 1435–1444 (2007)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ziadi, T., Blanc, X., Raji, A.: From requirements to code revisited. In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Object/Component/Service-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, pp. 228–235. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christophe Marquesuzaà
    • 1
    Email author
  • Patrick Etcheverry
    • 1
  • Sébastien Laborie
    • 1
  • Thierry Nodenot
    • 1
  • The Nhan Luong
    • 2
  1. 1.Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, Laboratoire d’informatiqueAngletFrance
  2. 2.Faculty of Computer Science and EngineeringHo Chi Minh City University of TechnologyHo Chi Minh CityVietnam

Personalised recommendations