E-Documents as Tools for the Humanized Management of Community Knowledge

  • Piero Mussio
Conference paper


e-Documents appear as a new media, complementing the traditional documents in recording, evolving and making available community knowledge. The process of interaction between members of the community and e-documents appears as a new and complex field that is constrained by present day design and implementation technologies. These constraints result in e-documents that become fences that drive the community members to follow unfamiliar reasoning strategies, to adopt unreliable procedures and to reach undesired goals. To dissolve the fence, the design and implementation of interactive, multimodal, hypermedia e-documents require new models and new metrics of interpretation. This paper proposes a model-based approach to the study of the expert-document interaction process and frames the phenomena that characterize this process.


Tacit Knowledge Turing Machine Enterprise Architecture Density Evaluation Community Knowledge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B. Schneiderman, Leonardo’s Laptop: Human needs and the New Computing Technologies, Invited Talk, Opening Session, UACHI Conference, Crete, June 03,
  2. 2.
    P. Wegner, D. Goldin, Computation beyond Turing machines, Communications of the ACM, 46 (4), 100–102 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. Lawson, How Designers Think ( Architectural Press, Oxford, 1997 ).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. E. Iverson, Notation as a tool of thought, Communications of the ACM, 23 (8), 444–465 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Carrara, D. Fogli, G. Fresta, P. Mussio, Toward overcoming culture, skill and situation hurdles in human-computer interaction. Int. Journal Universal Access in the Information Society, 1 (4), 288–304 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Petre, T. R. G. Green, Learning to Read Graphics: Some Evidence that `Seeing’ an Information Display is an Acquired Skill. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 4 (1), 55–70 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO Standard: ISO 5456 Technical Drawing Projection Methods.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Codognet, An historical Account of Indexical Images: from Ancient Art to Web, Proc. 1999 Symp. On Visual Languages, IEEE Comp. Society.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Hornbæk, E. Frekjarr, Reading Patterns and Usability in Visualization of Electronic Documents, ACM TOCHI, Vol. 10, No. 2 (2003).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Preece, Human-Computer Interaction (Addison-Wesley, 1994 ).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Shamber, What is a document? Rethinking the concept in uneasy times. Journal of the ASIS, 47 (9), 669671 (1996).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. F. Costabile, D. Fogli, G. Fresta, P. Mussio., A. Piccinno, Computer Environments for Improving End-User Accessibility, in: N. Carbonell and C. Stephanidis (Eds), “Universal Access–Theoretical Perspectives, Practice, and Experience”, LNCS 2615, 129–140 (2002).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. J. Majhew. Principles and Guideline in Software User Interface Design (Prentice Hall, 1992 ).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Arondi, P. Baroni, D. Fogli, P. Mussio. Supporting co-evolution of users and systems by the recognition of Interaction Patterns. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI 2002), Trento, May 2002, 177–189.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Bieber, F. Vitali, H. Ashman, V. Balasubramanian, H. Oinas-Kukkonen, Fourth Generation Hypermedia: Some Missing Links for the WWW. Int. Journal Human Computer Studies, 47, 31–65 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P.Bottoni, M. F. Costabile, P. Mussio, Specification and Dialogue Control of Visual Interaction through Visual Rewriting Systems, ACM Trans. on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 21, No. 6, 10771136, (1999).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Barnard, J. May, D. Duke, D. Duce, Systems, Interactions, and Macrotheory. ACM Trans. on Human-Computer Interaction,7(2), 222–262.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Nielsen, Usability Engineering ( Academic Press, San Diego, 1994 ) p. 219.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Nielsen, Usability Engineering ( Academic Press, San Diego, 1994 ).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. I. March, N. D. Mehandjiev, Tailoring as Collaboration: The Mediating Role of Multiple Representations and Application Units, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 9, 75–100 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Bourguin, A. Derycke, J C. Tarby, Beyond the Interface: Co-evolution inside Interactive Systems - A Proposal Founded on Activity Theory, Proc. IHM-HCI (2001).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Dix, J. Finlay, G. Abowd, R. Beale, Human Computer Interaction ( Prentice Hall, London, 1998 ).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. Filkenstein, Enterprise Integration Using Enterprise Architecture, Keynote Address, ISD 2003, Melbourne, Aug. 2003.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. Borchers. A pattern approach to interaction design (John Wiley and Sons, 2001 ).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. Mussio, M. Pietrogrande, M. Protti, Simulation of Hepatological Models: a Study in Visual Interactive Exploration of Scientific Problems, Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 2, 75–95 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    D. A. Norman,. Emotion and design: Attractive things work better. Interactions Magazine, ix (4), 36–42 (2002).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. Bianchi, M. D’Enza, M. Matera, A. Betta, Designing Usable Visual Languages: the Case of Immune System Studies, Proc. IEEE Int Symposium on VL99, September 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Piero Mussio
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze dell’InformazioneUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations