1.
Different from the previous papers I read in this class, this one deals with the interaction of human and computer mainly on one to one basis. Direct interaction of participants in a physical multimedial environment (such as EDC) is an important part of human-computer interaction. However, the interaction of various participants located in different spatial and temaporal environment is also essential part of the activity. Such a interactions is exploited in this paper by using different embedded critiquing mechnism through a pratical example. That is what draw my interest on this paper.
2.
Embedding critics are most effective when it is used in a domain-oriented design. The embeded critcs can be created from the three different critiquing machinisms, namely, generic, specific and interpretive critics.
3.
I'd like to know more about the development and implementation of specific and interpretive critics in design environment.
4.
Many text-eding software may share some similarity with HYDRA described in the paper. They use spelling and grammer checker to provide generic critics to the user. This is the first paper I read on embeding supportng system in design environment.
5.
Design: As the paper pointed out "human critiquing plays an important role in design both in the growth of human knowledge and in terms fo error elimination.", the critics can not only make the design more effective but also error-freer. The challenge of complex problem characterized by "symmtry of ignorance" are best dealt with the embeding critiquing system.
Learning: Since we learn from our error, embeding critiquing system provide a excellent opportunity to learn in a design enviornment.
Collaboration: This paper provide a different kind of collaboration as we saw in EDC. In HYDRA, the collaboration of participants comes across different times and locations. In HYDRA, They may input their ideas, critics and their specific requirments separately into the embeding critiquing system.
Multimedia Support: Maybe the visual warning and critics are the ones.
6.
Since generic critiquing domain are based on the standard and regulations of an design domain, it is the most static one. On the contrast, specific and interpretive cirtiquing domains are more dynamic. I'd like to exploit more on how to handle the diversity of specific and interpretive domain brought up by different users, is it necessary to set up the libraries of subdomains to cope with the diversity?