2012-02-10 AUI workshop

From W3C Wiki
(Redirected from 2012-02-10 MBUI Benefits)
Jump to: navigation, search
  • Minutes MBUIWG on AUI workshop (morning 10/02/2012)
  • List of Participants: Ran Zhang, Moritz Kuemmerling, Marc Seissler, Kai Breiner, Jaroslav Pullmann (Fraunhofer FIT), François Beuvens, Davide Spano, Javier Rodriguez, Nikolaos Kaklanis, Annerose Braune, Dave Raggett, Marius Orfgen
  • Remote Participants: Gaelle Calvary, Ignacio Marin, Cristina Gonzalez, Jan Van den Bergh, Sebastian Feuerstack


  • First round on the different features for each language and how they address the AUI
    • UseML
      • Core component = Dialog, Structure, Behavior
      • Behavior is event-based
      • Structure parts may be overwritten by other parts
      • Navigation aspects are very important (relative or absolute)
      • Static and dynamic concerns are well separated with Structure and Behavior entities
      • Two parts in the comparison table: for the structure (static part) and for the behavior (dynamic part)
      • Example: ComboBox (at CUI) would be abstracted in a Select
      • All the different parameters (Container, Input, Output, Change, Select and Trigger) should be considered in the comparison table
      • The categories of structures remain simple >< in UsiXML many specifications are defined like Rating refining a Select
      • Discussion about how to model input/output as a single entity or by grouping input and output
      • Expression of external data is not defined
      • Importance of a link to an external system, or external data source --> concept of "data binding"
      • Restructure allows restructure elements from the structure. e.g. adding a new element at runtime -> may be viewed as a kind of adaptation rule
      • For adaptation we should consider Restructure concept
      • In ECA rule, one particular type of action could be restructure
      • Reusable behavior: a rule is defined one time and may be reused afterwards
      • Importance of constraint expressivity: see XForms and Taxonomy of integrity constraints
      • At what level should be expressed the constraints?
      • Distinction between domain-oriented constraints and domain-independent constraints
      • Access rights, security-based mechanisms
      • Definition of these concepts could be realized by roles and rights on these roles
      • Security access should remain optional, we can't enforce model the entire world!
      • Importance of providing access points in the model to plug other parts like adaptation
      • How to combine different features such as navigation/operation?
    • IdealXML
      • Focused on CUI
      • No specific requirements
      • In the table, we could have AUI elements first, but CUI elements too in order to get the correspondence (adding a new column)
    • CUI DSL of University of Dresden
      • Add another column to CUI to have the correspondence with AUI (as for IdealXML)
    • MariaXML
      • Behavior part has 2 levels: dialog and event handlers
      • Expression of the dialog in a global way and in a local way
      • Data Model is expressed through .xsd definition -> allows to communicate with external data source
      • Categorization of groups
      • Composite Description describes content as images, videos, … -> distinction from interactors
      • How do we express the distinction between interactive parts and non-interactive parts?
      • Importance of the simplicity of the language, trying not to lose usability
      • Events coming from users
      • .xsd expressivity may be limited at some point
  • Discussions with remote participants
    • Inputs from Sebastian Feuerstack
      • How do we clearly define the Dialog at AUI regarding the CUI
      • May Dialog be viewed as the Behavior? Are they related concepts?
      • How to express the Distribution at abstract level
      • How do we express local dialog vs global dialog?
      • How to address the minimal requirements for the dialog depending on the modality? What is the default behavior?
    • General discussions
      • What are the possible paths according the Cameleon Reference Framework (e.g. one task to many auis, reflection, etc.)
      • Concepts should be first defined and then discussed how to use them afterwards
      • Concept of containers that can be split (very useful for adaptation to different screen sizes as mobile, tablets, desktop, etc.)
      • Concept of goals expressing how elaborated should be a UI depending on the constraints (e.g. size constraints)
      • We should add in the comparison table a CUI with modality different from graphical
    • Inputs from Jan Van den Bergh
      • splitability of containers
      • domain-oriented dependencies
      • use of UML stereotypes
      • Multi-types approach: instead of hierarchies of types, we work on a partition of types
      • Canonical prototypes (Q. Limburg)
      • Delegating as much as possible specific attributes
      • Extensibilty of the template approach, for redefinition of common parts
    • Inputs from Gaelle Calvary
      • How do we capture exceptional scenarios, especially depending on error
      • How to support the CARE properties (especially if we target multi-context)
      • How to group things and what kind of grouping (semantically, …) e.g., tasks oriented, or based on common factors
    • Inputs from Ignacio Marin
      • The link with use cases is very important
      • The use cases can useful for 2 things: to know what we want to achieve, but also to limit our expressivity