![[spacer]](/schemes/blue/line.gif){kind=small}
I did not work in a group, and I decided to read the PiTaBoard paper.
I have normally thought of human-computer interaction in the context of one person interacting with one computer. I think that enabling multiple people to communicate through the medium of one computer seems quite promising for enhancing collaboaration. Another important consideration is the viewing of people as consumers only in new media. It seems to me that much more power could be available through allowing people to design and collaborate in new media as well, in particular in allowing a the capabilities of a group of people to be enhanced by the capabilities of a computer.
The chosen application to urban planning, while a noble one, is probably a bit outside my interest area. I am more interested in how experts can exchange knowledge and collaborate, in particular experts from the software field. However, these ideas and technologies are not specific to urban planning, so this is not a major problem.
I think the main message of the article is that design activities will increasingly require collaboration, and that innovative approaches to human-computer interaction can help people build shared knowledge, and relate to the problem they are trying to solve more directly. In particular, these approaches can make an uninformed participant into an informed participant for many problems.
Programmers as "End Users" - how to design systems which allow trained programmers - not just some average user - to express their ideas more directly. I would like to learn more about motivation and rewards as well; since I agree that people need certain motivating feelings to encourage participation in design, not just for the sake of technology. I am also curious about the notion that Software systems must evolve. While I agree this is true, I believe that most software systems will be built very poorly if there is not some careful design effort before implementation begins. I realize that "open design" is a part of this, but I wonder whether open design can overcomplicate systems. I would like to think/talk more about how Software development groups can reconcile these concepts in the creation of a complex software system.
One of the most interesting elements for me are the interaction of multiple people with each other and with a computer concurrently, which for me is an unfamiliar form of human-computer interaction. In conjunction with this, the idea of providing contextual information for learning on demand is very interesting to me. Since there is so much information available, being able to place information in context can contribute much to the learning experience of people.
Not really. I don't have much experience in HCI, and no similar project comes to mind.
The challenge of designing complex systems (software systems, for example) is increasing, and will require special techniques, particularly in relation to collaboration, to be able to design reasonable resolutions to these complex problems.
The concept of learning on demand, or learning supporting action, I think is an important one. As the paper says, people are already faced with more information than can be easily digested. As such, the presentation of useful and relevant information supporting action could be very helpful.
One interesting idea is that many designers are required to collect all the knowledge and expertise required for a specific problem. I have not thought about this specifically in the past, but my professional experience supports the idea.
Very different media from the traditional keyboard and monitor can support collaboration in a much more interesting way. However, people unfamiliar with the technology can become confused due to incorrect assumptions they have made. However, through utilizing an evolutionary design, the project can be made to more closely meet the needs of users at every step.
While the representation of physical object is the most logical first step, I personally would be interested in the communication and visualization of complex systems that are traditionally difficult to visualize. For example, a goal I would be interested in is to help engineers who are working with a complex system (a software system, for example) bring their ideas together and try to visualize the relationships and structure present. |
