skip to main content
10.1145/948496.948527acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Manipulating concept maps with constrained regions

Authors Info & Claims
Published:24 May 1998Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper addresses the direct manipulation of concept maps. These maps are visually supported by graph-based diagrams. Constraints on nodes, visual attributes and arcs, reflect the syntax and semantic of the underlying conceptual model. Tools allowing the manipulation of concept maps convey these constraints by offering simple feedback hints to user actions. Particular application domains require the use of spatial regions (contexts) to convey equivalence on concept properties or types. In these cases, further restrictions are imposed. Therefore, richer feedback must be supported for effective direct manipulation.The paper proposes an approach to handle spatial contexts in concept maps. The approach provides means to define enhanced feedback on direct manipulation of concepts and relations within and over context boundaries. The technique is based on the separtion of the feedback representations for device and action. It controls their relative distance, mobility and visual attributes. Manipulation of contexts and simultaneous views over contexts are also discussed. Specific behaviors are proposed and a technique to offer coherent views on multiple contexts is presented. The architecture of the system that supports these features is described.

References

  1. P. Antunes and N. Guimarães. Structuring elements for group interaction. In Second Conference on Concurrent Engineering, Research and Applications (CE95), Washington, DC, August 1995. Concurrent Technologies Corporation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute. Hardy homepage, 1997. http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/~hardy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. R. Axelrod. Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. C. Batini, S. Ceri, and S. Navathe. Concepual Database Design: An ER Approach. Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. Battista, P. Eades, R. Tamassia, and I. Tollis. Algorithms for drawing graphs: an annotated bibliography. Technical report, Dept. of Computer Science, Brown University, June 1994. ftp://wilma.cs.brown.edu/pub/-papers/compgeo/gdbiblio.ps.z.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. G. Booch. Object Oriented Design with Applications. Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. G. Booch and J. Rumbaught. Unified Method for Object-Oriented Development Set. Rational Software Corporation, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. L. Carrico, P. Antunes, and N. Guimarães. Managing perspectives of changing organizational systems. Working document available upon request http://digitais.ist.utl.pt/lmc, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. L. Carriço and N. Guimarães. Facilitating analysis and diagnosis in organisations. In Proceedings of the CAiSE '97 Conference, Barcelona, Spain, June 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. P. Carriço and N. Guimarães. Integrated multiviews. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, Special Issue on visual Navigation: Methods and Tools, 1998. Accepted for publication.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P. Coad and E. Yourdon. Object Oriented Analysis. Prentice-Hall, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. C. Eden. Strategy development and implementation: Cognitive mapping for group support. In J. Hendry and G. Johnson with J. Newton, editors, Strategic Thinking: Leadership and the Management of Change. Addison-Wesley, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. C. Ellis and J. Wainer. Goal-based models of collaboration. Collaborative Computing, 1:61--86, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. B. Gaines and M. Shaw. Concept maps as hypermedia components. Knowledge Science Institute Home Page, 1995. http://ksi.cpsc.ucalgary.ca.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. A. Huff. Mapping strategic thought. In A. Huff, editor, Mapping Strategic Thought. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. V. Kremer, Rob. Concept Graphs: A Concept Map "MetaLanguage". PhD thesis, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. M. Laukkanen. Comparative Cause Mapping of Management Cognitions. Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. R. Marshak. Workflow white paper: An overview of workflow software. In WORKFLOW '94 Conference Proceedings, San Jose, August 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. R. Medina-Mora, T. Winograd, R. Flores, and F. Flores. The action workflow approach to workflow management technology. In Proceedings of ACM CSCW '92 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, pages 281--288, Toronto, Canada, November 1992. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. H. Mintzberg. Structure in Fives. Prentice-Hall, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. B. Myers, A. Ferrency, R. McDaniel, R. Miller, Patrick D., Andy M., and A. Klimovitski. The amulet v2.0 reference manual. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. F. Penz and L. Carrico. Objects feeling objects in a multiview object space. In Vienna Conference on HUMAN CONPUTER INTERACTION 93, Fin de Siècle, Viena, Austria, September 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. J. Poras. Stream Analysis. Organization Development. Addison- Wesley, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. R. Reger. Managerial thought structures and competitive positioning. In A. Huff, editor, Mapping Strategic Thought. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. L. Shastri. Semantic Networks: An Evidential Formalization and its Connectionist Realization. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. Shum and N. Hammond. Argumentation-based design rationale: From conceptual roots to current use. Technical Report EPC-1993-106, Rank Xerox Research Centre, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. J. Sowa, editor. Principles of Semantic Networks: Explorations in the Representation of Knowledge. Morgan-Kaufman, San Mateo, California, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Visio. Visio homepage, 1997. http://www.visio.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    AVI '98: Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces
    May 1998
    295 pages
    ISBN:9781450374354
    DOI:10.1145/948496

    Copyright © 1998 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 24 May 1998

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate107of408submissions,26%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader