skip to main content
10.1145/1370114.1370128acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Benefits of interactive display environments in the software development process

Authors Info & Claims
Published:13 May 2008Publication History

ABSTRACT

Models become increasingly important for software development processes. Though there is a multitude of software modeling tools available, the handling of diagrams is still difficult. To overcome these problems we propose the usage of novel visualization and interaction techniques for the software development process, including multi-touch displays, the integration of diagrams drawn by hand and the interaction through zoomable user interfaces.

References

  1. Aliakseyeu, D., Subramanian, S., Lucero, A., and Gutwin, C. 2006. Interacting with piles of artifacts on digital tables. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual interfaces (Venezia, Italy, May 23 - 26, 2006). AVI '06. ACM, New York, NY, 159--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Anoto functionality, http://www.anoto.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Baudisch, P., Cutrell, E., Robbins, D., Czerwinski, M., Tandler, P. Bederson, B., and Zierlinger, A. Drag-and-Pop and Drag-and-Pick: Techniques for Accessing Remote Screen Content on Touch- and Pen-operated Systems. In Proceedings of Interact 2003, Zurich Switzerland, August 2003, pp. 57--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherubini, M., Venolia, G., DeLine, R., and Ko, A. J. 2007. Let's go to the whiteboard: how and why software developers use drawings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA, April 28 - May 03, 2007). CHI '07. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Dekel, U. 2005. Supporting distributed software design meetings: what can we learn from co-located meetings?. In Proceedings of the 2005 Workshop on Human and Social Factors of Software Engineering (St. Louis, Missouri, May 16 - 16, 2005). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Hinrichs, U., Carpendale, S., and Scott, S. D. 2006. Evaluating the effects of fluid interface components on tabletop collaboration. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual interfaces (Venezia, Italy, May 23 - 26, 2006). AVI '06. ACM, New York, NY, 27--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Ko, A. J., DeLine, R., and Venolia, G. 2007. Information Needs in Collocated Software Development Teams. In Proceedings of the 29th international Conference on Software Engineering (May 20 - 26, 2007). International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 344--353. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Köth, O. and Minas, M. 2002. Structure, Abstraction, and Direct Manipulation in Diagram Editors. In Proceedings of the Second international Conference on Diagrammatic Representation and inference (April 18 - 20, 2002). M. Hegarty, B. Meyer, and N. H. Narayanan, Eds. Lecture Notes In Computer Science, vol. 2317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Mazalek A; Davenport G ; Reynolds M; Sharing and Browsing Media on a Digital Tabletop; IEEE Multimedia, Special Issue on Continuous Archival and Retrieval of Personal Experiences, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Morris, M. R., Paepcke, A., Winograd, T., and Stamberger, J. 2006. TeamTag: exploring centralized versus replicated controls for co-located tabletop groupware. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montréal, Québec, Canada, April 22 - 27, 2006). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Microsoft Surface, multi-touch display, http://www.microsoft.com/surface/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Nacenta, M. A., Pinelle, D., Stuckel, D., and Gutwin, C. 2007. The effects of interaction technique on coordination in tabletop groupware. In Proceedings of Graphics interface 2007 (Montreal, Canada, May 28 - 30, 2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Perspective Pixel, Inc., multi-touch displays, http://www.perceptivepixel.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. IBM, Rational Rose, http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/developer/rose/modeler/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Reetz, A., Gutwin, C., Stach, T., Nacenta, M., and Subramanian, S. 2006. Superflick: a natural and efficient technique for long-distance object placement on digital tables. In Proceedings of Graphics interface 2006 (Quebec, Canada, June 07 - 09, 2006). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Scott, S. D., Carpendale, M. S., and Habelski, S. 2005. Storage Bins: Mobile Storage for Collaborative Tabletop Displays. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 25, 4 (Jul. 2005), 58--65. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Sparx Systems, Enterprise Architect, http://www.sparxsystems.de/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Tandler, P., Prante, T., Müller-Tomfelde, C., Streitz, N., and Steinmetz, R. 2001. Connectables: dynamic coupling of displays for the flexible creation of shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM Symposium on User interface Software and Technology (Orlando, Florida, November 11 - 14, 2001). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Benefits of interactive display environments in the software development process

      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

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader