Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 771–784 | Cite as

Distributed Web browsing: supporting frequent uses and opportunistic requirements

  • Sergio FirmenichEmail author
  • Gabriela Bosetti
  • Gustavo Rossi
  • Marco Winckler
  • José María Corletto
Long Paper


Nowadays, the development of Web applications supporting distributed user interfaces (DUI) is straightforward. However, it is still hard to find Web sites supporting this kind of user interaction. Although studies on this field have demonstrated that DUI would improve the user experience, users are not massively empowered to manage these kinds of interactions. In this setting, we propose to move the responsibility of distributing both the UI and user interaction, from the application (a Web application) to the client (the Web browser), giving also rise to inter-application interaction distribution. This paper presents a platform for client-side DUI, built on the foundations of Web augmentation and End User Development. The idea is to empower end users to apply an augmentation layer over existing Web applications, considering both frequent use and opportunistic DUI requirements. In this work, we present the architecture and a prototype tool supporting this approach and illustrate the incorporation of some DUI features through case studies.


Web augmentation DUI End-user development 



This work was supported by STIC AMSUD project WAMAW-OUR: Web Augmentation Methods for Adapting Web Sites for Supporting Opportunistic User Require-ents


  1. 1.
    Bandelloni, R., Paternò, F.: Flexible interface migration. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 148–155. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bharat, K.A., Cardelli, L.: Migratory applications. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface and Software Technology, pp. 132–142. ACM (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Di Geronimo, L., Husmann, M., Patel, A., Tuerk, C., Norrie, M.C.: Ctat: tilt-and-tap across devices. In: International Conference on Web Engineering, pp. 96–113. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Díaz, O., Arellano, C.: The augmented web: rationales, opportunities, and challenges on browser-side transcoding. ACM Trans. Web (TWEB) 9(2), 8 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Díaz, O., Aldalur, I., Arellano, C., Medina, H., Firmenich, S.: Web mashups with WebMakeup. In: Daniel, F., Pautasso, C. (eds.) Rapid Mashup Development Tools. Communications in Computer and Information Science, pp. 82–97. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elmqvist, N.: Distributed user interfaces: state of the art. In: Gallud, J., Tesoriero, R., Penichet, V. (eds.) Distributed User Inter-faces, pp. 1–12. Springer, London (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Firmenich, S., Bosetti, G., Rossi, G., Winckler, M.: Flexible distribution of existing web interfaces: an architecture involving developers and end-users. In: 5th Workshop on Distributed User Interfaces, ICWE (2016, in press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Winckler, M.: A domain specific language for orchestrating user tasks whilst navigation web sites. In: International Conference on Web Engineering, pp. 224–232. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frosini, L., Paternò, F.: User interface distribution in multi-device and multi-user environments with dynamically migrating engines. In: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, pp. 55–64. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Pearson Education, London (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghiani, G., Paternò, F., Santoro, C.: On-demand cross-device interface components migration. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, pp. 299–308. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Halbert, D.C.: Programming by example. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley (1984)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Han, R., Perret, V., Naghshineh, M.: WebSplitter: a unified XML framework for multi-device collaborative Web browsing. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 221–230. ACM (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huynh, D., Mazzocchi, S., Karger, D.: Piggy bank: experience the semantic web inside your web browser. In: International Semantic Web Conference, pp. 413–430. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jones, W.: Personal information management. Ann. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol. 41(1), 453–504 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, K., Javed, W., Williams, C., Elmqvist, N., Irani, P.: Hugin: a framework for awareness and coordination in mixed-presence collaborative information visualization. In: ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces, pp. 231–240. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leshed, G., Haber, E.M., Matthews, T., Lau, T.: CoScripter: automating and sharing how-to knowledge in the enterprise. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1719–1728. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Klann, M., Wulf, V.: End-User Development: An Emerging Paradigm, pp. 1–8. Springer, Dordrecht (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Manca, M., Paternò, F.: Customizable dynamic user interface distribution. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, pp. 27–37. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nardi, B.A.: A Small Matter of Programming: Perspectives on End User Computing. MIT press, Cambridge (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sanctorum, A., Signer, B.: Towards user-defined cross-device interaction. In: 5th Workshop on Distributed User Interfaces, ICWE (2016, in press)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schreiner, M., Rädle, R., Jetter, H.C., Reiterer, H.: Connichiwa: a frame-work for cross-device web applications. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2163–2168. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vanderdonckt, J.: Distributed user interfaces: how to distribute user interface elements across users, platforms, and environments. In: Proceedings of XI Interacción, p. 20 (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vandervelpen, C., Vanderhulst, G., Luyten, K., Coninx, K.: Light-weight distributed web interfaces: preparing the web for heterogeneous environments. In: Web Engineering, pp. 197–202. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Villanueva, P.G., Tesoriero, R., Gallud, J.A.: Proxywork: distributing user interface components of web applications. In: DUI@ EICS, pp. 58–61 (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yang, J., Wigdor, D.: Panelrama: enabling easy specification of cross-device web applications. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2783–2792. ACM (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LIFIA, Facultad de InformátcaUNLPLa PlataArgentina
  2. 2.CONICETLa PlataArgentina
  3. 3.ICS-IRITUniversity of Toulouse 3ToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations