This paper describes new interaction techniques for direct pen-based interaction on the Interactive Mural, a large (6’x3.5’) high resolution (64 dpi) display. They have been tested in a digital brainstorming tool that has been used by groups of professional product designers. Our “interactive wall ” metaphor for interaction has been guided by several goals: to support both free-hand sketching and high-resolution materials, such as images, 3D models and GUI application windows; to present a visual appearance that does not clutter the content with control devices; and to support fluid interaction, which minimizes the amount of attention demanded and interruption due to the mechanics of the interface. We have adapted and extended techniques that were developed for electronic whiteboards and generalized the use of the FlowMenu to execute a wide variety of actions in a single pen stroke. While this techniques were designed for a brainstorming tool, they are very general and can be used in a wide variety of application domains using interactive surfaces.

Flatland is an augmented whiteboard interface designed for informal office work. Our research has investigated approaches to building an augmented whiteboard in the context of continuous, long term office use. In particular, we have pursued three avenues of research based on input from user studies: techniques for the management of space on the board, the ability to flexibly apply behaviors to support varied application semantics, and mechanisms for managing history on the board. Unlike some previously reported systems, our design choices have been influenced by a desire to support preproduction---rather than final production---work in an office setting.

A Collaborage is a collaborative collage of physically represented information on a surface that is connected with electronic information, such as a physical In/Out board connected to a people-locator database. The physical surface (board) contains items that are tracked by camera and computer vision technology. Events on the board trigger electronic services. This paper motivates this concept, presents three different applications, describes the system architecture and component technologies, and discusses several design issues.

Our goal is to provide tools to support working meetings on an electronic whiteboard, called Tivoli. This paper de- scribes how we have integrated structured "domain objects" into the whiteboard environment. Domain objects represent the subject matter of meetings and can be exchanged between Tivoli and group databases. Domain objects can be tailored to produce meeting tools that are finely tuned to meeting practices. We describe the facility for tailoring and managing domain objects and the user interface techniques for blending these into the whiteboard environment. We show examples of both specific and generic meeting tools crafted from domain objects, and we describe a long-term case study in which these tools support an ongoing work process.

Abstract not found

Although many recent systems have been built to support Information Capture and Retrieval (ICR), these have not generally been successful. This paper presents studies that evaluate two different hypotheses for this failure, firstly that systems fail to address user needs and secondly that they provide only rudimentary support for ICR. Having first presented a taxonomy of different systems built to support ICR, we then describe a study that attempts to identify user needs for ICR. On the basis of that study we carried out two user-oriented evaluations. In the first we carried out a task-based evaluation of a state-of-the-art ICR system, finding that it failed to provide users with abstract ways to view meetings data, and did not present users with information categories that they considered to be important. In a second study we introduce a new method for comparative evaluation of different techniques for accessing meetings data. The second study showed that simple interface techniques that extracted key information from meetings were effective in allowing users to extract gist from meetings data. We conclude with a discussion of outstanding issues and future directions for ICR research.

Hand-drawn sketches have traditionally been used to depict design ideas because they are quick to draw and can include as much or little detail as is required to convey the essence of the ideas. Computer tools are now an alternative and offer advantages for editing, storing and transmitting designs. However, designers consistently reject using current computer tools because these tools interrupt the creative process. Various studies have supported the designer’s position, consistently showing that traditional tools produce more and better design ideas. This thesis describes the development and evaluation of a design-friendly computer tool that focuses specifically on the needs of the novice programmer who is designing user interfaces. From an extensive review of the literature on design, learning to programming and previous sketch tools we extracted the specifications for a tool that: compares favourably as a design medium with traditional tools such as the pen, paper and whiteboards, provides the editing and storage support expected of computer tools, helps students to gain a better

Tivoli is an application program to support working meet-ings on an electronic whiteboard. Tivoli's user interface is based on a whiteboard metaphor. It supports freeform expression by providing pen-based drawing, wiping, and gestural editing. Tivoli recognizes the spatial structure of material on the board. It provides support for implicit structures, such as opening and closing spaces when lists are edited. It provides techniques for organizing materials on the board by grouping them into regions. Tivoli inte-grates domain objects, structured data that can be ex-changed with external databases, into the ffreeform whiteboard environment. Tivoli's scripting language allows the structure, appearance, behavior, and dynamic computa-tions of domain objects to be defined. Domain objects can be customized to create meeting tools that are finely tuned to particular meeting practices. Tivoli smoothly integrates both freeform and structured interaction techniques.

To examine the impacts of enhanced UI feedback on shoulder-to-shoulder computing, we conducted a study using a simple picture puzzle on a computer with one display, two mice, and one keyboard. After adding sound, color differentiation, status indicators, and a graphical history, the accuracy with which subjects reported the actions of the person sitting next to them increased significantly. Participants also took more time to complete the puzzle. Subjects shared the keyboard more when using the enhanced UI. We also found participants sitting to the left of the screen to be considerably more productive across both UIs. Keywords CSCW, groupware, shoulder to shoulder, single display groupware, co-located collaboration, multi-person interfaces, multi-user interfaces, multiple input devices, mice, awareness, turn taking, shared understanding, seat position, left and right

Classroom 2000, now named eClass, is a huge research project. This work could not have occurred without the efforts of many undergraduate and graduate students along with many visiting and resident researchers. It would also not be possible without the support of Dean Freeman, the instructors, and all of the students who have used eClass. I also want to thank researchers at Kennesaw State University, Brown University, and McGill University who have helped legitimize my research by applying it at their own schools. We have had the fortune of being in the public eye, and I want to thank all the people responsible for getting us in the newspapers and on TV, especially the public relations department here at Georgia Tech. Of course, I would like to thank my Advisor, Gregory Abowd, for allowing me to run freely with his vision so that I could take it and make it my own. I could not overstate the value of his guidance, patience, and support over the past four years. I’m afraid I’ve been more trouble than he anticipated, but then again, I don’t think eClass hurt his tenure campaign either, so maybe we’re even? Hmm … probably not. I am deeply indebted to my colleagues and fellow researchers for their work and