towards the formalization of interaction semantics

Towards the Formalization of Interaction SemanticsI-SEMANTICS – 6th International Conference on Semantic Systems – Graz, 1st-3rd September 2010 – © CEFRIEL 2010

Towards the Formalization of Towards the Formalization of Interaction SemanticsInteraction Semantics

Paper Authors:

Presenter: Irene Celinohttp://swa.cefriel.it http://iricelino.org

Francesco CorcoglionitiDip. Di Elettronica e Informazione

Politcnico di MilanoVia Ponzio 34/5

20133 Milano, [email protected]

Irene CelinoCEFRIEL – ICT Institute

Politecnico di MilanoVia Fucini 2

20133 Milano, [email protected]

Graz, September 3rd 2010 – © CEFRIEL 20102Towards the Formalization of Interaction Semantics

AgendaAgendaBackground

Problem statement

Our approachSTAR:ship and STAR:dust ontologies

STAR:chart framework

Case study and evaluation

Challenges and evolutions


BackgroundBackgroundTwo trends:

Semantic PortalsSemantic PortalsLong-lasting trend in Semantic Web research (from early 2000)Reuse data semantics to create hyperlinks and navigation paths

Increasing attention on VisualizationVisualizationEngaging, emotional and/or natural information visualization“User-friendly” interfaces and intuitive representations


Problem statement and motivationProblem statement and motivation

Data manager Web designer

I know what my data are about I know how to design a

Web application

Data knowledge Web knowledge

Mmmh… I think the Web design doesn’t reflect the meaning of my data. Can you make my data

Web presentation more effective and meaningful? Sigh… I made my best to present the data, but they are hard to understand for me. Can you better explain

to me what they mean and your expectations?

And I don’t want to learn all data details…

I don’t want to deal with technical details…


Cherry picking from today solutionsCherry picking from today solutionsWeb 2.0 and user experience

Interaction Patterns categorizations“Fruition modalitiesFruition modalities”, i.e. how interaction patterns on the Web impact user navigation

Web engineeringWeb Information Architecture and “sitemaps”

Model-driven Web engineering and Semantic Web

Semantic Web technologies and knowledge modelingOntologies, mapping and rules


Domain knowledge vs. Interaction knowledgeDomain knowledge vs. Interaction knowledge

Data managerWeb designer

STAR:dustontology

STAR:shipontology

domainontology

Conceptualization of interaction patterns

Conceptualization of Web applications structure


domainontology

some portalontology

M

?!? ?!?

M1

M2

Traditional approaches

Our approach to Our approach to ““fill the gapfill the gap””


STAR:chart foundations STAR:chart foundations –– high levelhigh level


Data knowledge Web knowledgeSTAR:chartSTAR:chartframeworkframework

STAR:chart is a framework to develop knowledgeknowledge--intensive Web applicationsintensive Web applicationsthat reduces the gapreduces the gap between data managers’ point of view and Web designers’ one, by letting data managers express their requirementsdata managers express their requirements in a more straightforward way

and by helping Web designersWeb designers to deal only with designdeal only with design--related issuesrelated issues.

STAR:dustontology

STAR:shipontology

domainontology

Declaratively defined by the Data Manager (by using STAR:dust) Semi-automatically generated

by STAR:chart based on “fruition modalities” patterns

M2

M1


STAR:shipSTAR:ship ontologyontologyConceptualization of the Web structural and visual elements that constitute the elementary building blocks of a Web page organizationSpecification of the primitives to model the structure of a Web application, i.e. its sitemap in terms of areas, pages, "units" or "widgets" and linksIt reflects the Web designer mindset

# STAR:ship namespace declaration@prefix ss: <http://swa.cefriel.it/ontologies/starship#> .

# definition of the widget classss:Widget a owl:Class ;

rdfs:subClassOf ss:Unit .

# definition of the event classss:Event a owl:Class .

# definition of the triggersEvent propertyss:triggersEvent a owl:AnnotationProperty .

# example of widget definitionss:SearchFormWidget a owl:Class ;

rdfs:subClassOf ss:Widget ;ss:hasJavaClass "it.cefriel.swa.star.widgets.SearchFormWidget"^^xsd:string ;ss:triggersEvent ss:submitSearchEvent .

http://swa.cefriel.it/ontologies/starship#


STAR:dust ontologySTAR:dust ontologySpecification of the different roles the data should play in a Web applicationDefinition of the "fruition modalities", i.e. the possible interaction styles of the final users with the presented information (searching, browsing, detail viewing, tagging, editing, rating, etc.)It expresses the best practices to access and interact with the data

# STAR:dust namespace declaration@prefix sd: <http://swa.cefriel.it/ontologies/stardust#> .

# definition of the PresentationProperty classsd:PresentationProperty a rdfs:Class ;

rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Property .

# definition of some presentation propertiessd:RelevantProperty a sd:PresentationProperty .sd:SortableProperty a sd:PresentationProperty .sd:EditableProperty a sd:PresentationProperty .

It represents the data expert's point of view it can be used in the mapping to domain-specific ontologies

http://swa.cefriel.it/ontologies/stardust#


# definition of mapping in STAR:dustsd:PresentationMapping a owl:Class .

# class and properties connected via a mappingsd:onClass a owl:ObjectProperty ;

rdfs:range rdfs:Class .

sd:mappingSource a owl:ObjectProperty ;rdfs:domain sd:PresentationMapping ;rdfs:range rdf:Property .

sd:mappingDestination a owl:ObjectProperty ;rdfs:domain sd:PresentationMapping ;rdfs:range sd:PresentationProperty .

Mapping between domain ontology and STAR:dust whenever a Web user interface is built on top of a new kind of datasetIt does not require dealing with fine-grained specification of data selectors and content formattingIt can be directly operated by the data expert, without the need of a specific knowledge about Web design and developmentThe structure of this mapping is part of the STAR:dust ontology

STAR:dustontology

domainontology

M1

Mapping M1Mapping M1

http://swa.cefriel.it/ontologies/stardust#


STAR:chart framework foundationsSTAR:chart framework foundations

STAR:dustSTAR:dust is the Web presentation and interaction conceptual model

The mappingmapping definitiondefinition is the artifact – by the data manager – that expresses the role of the data in the final Web application; it puts in relation the data ontology with the STAR:dust ontology

The widgetswidgets are the software components that implement the presentation and interaction patterns defined in the STAR:dust ontology

STAR:shipSTAR:ship is the Web sitemap structure conceptual model

The sitemapsitemap specificationspecification is the artifact – semi-automatically produced by the framework itself –that specifies the actual structure of the Web application in terms of widgets; it is expressed in terms of the STAR:ship ontology

widgets

STAR:dustontology

STAR:shipontology

mappingdefinition

sitemapspecification

interaction patterns

Web appl. patterns

M2

M1


STAR:chart framework architectureSTAR:chart framework architecture

framework core

widgetsSTAR:dustontology

STAR:shipontology

mappingdefinition

sitemapspecification

domainontology datasource

* *

**

portal pagesgeneration

config. timerun-time***


The projectThe project

“Service-Finder is a platform for service discovery in which Web Servicesare embedded in a Web 2.0 environment”“Service-Finder is a platform for service discovery in which Web Servicesare embedded in a Web 2.0 environment”

http://demo.service-finder.eu

The domain ontologies describe Web services and their characteristicsThe portal allows users to search and navigate through the service data and interact with the data in a Web 2.0 fashion

We mapped Service-Finder (SF) ontologies to the fruition modalities of the STAR:dustSTAR:dust ontologyWe expressed the sitemap in terms of the basic elements of the STAR:shipSTAR:ship ontology to describe the pages and their navigationWe employed the STAR:chartSTAR:chart framework to realize the SF portal


““Behind the scenesBehind the scenes”” of the SF Interfaceof the SF Interface

Mapping between SF ontologies and STAR:dust Service-Finder

ontologiesSTAR:dustontology

mappingdefinition

sfo:Servicesfo:hasNamesfo:rating

sfo:Endpointsfo:availabilityLastMonth

dc:titleSD:RelevantPropertySD:DetailProperty

:sampleServiceMapping a SD:PresentationMapping ;SD:onClass sfo:Service ;SD:mappingSource sfo:hasName ;SD:mappingDestination dc:title ; SD:mappingDestination SD:RelevantProperty ;SD:isMultiValue "false" ;rdfs:label "Name" ;SD:noValueText " - " .

CP

CP

P

P

P

P

map

ping

s.n3


Service-Finder portal sitemap


RatingWidget

TabWidget

PropertyWidget

AddTagWidget AddCategoryWidget

LoginWidget

Service details page



Widgets’ configuration

RatingWidget(Java class)

HTMLtemplate

Rating:

mapping definition

instance of RatingWidgeton sfo:Service

SELECT ?rWHERE{<s> a sfo:Service ;

sfo:rating ?r . }

:m1 a SD:PresentationMapping ;SD:onClass sfo:Service ;SD:mappingSource sfo:rating ;SD:mappingDestination SD:RatingProperty .

STAR:dust

SD:RatingProperty PSELECT ?rWHERE{

<x> a Class ;RatingProperty ?r.

}



Widgets’ executionRatingWidget

(Java class)

Rating:

HTMLtemplate

generatedHTML

fragment

Rating:

:ServiceX a sfo:Service ;sfo:rating “3.5” ;...

Triples in the datasource

instance ofRatingWidgeton sfo:Service

SELECT ?rWHERE{<s> a sfo:Service ;

sfo:rating ?r . }

Service details pageon :ServiceX

HTTP RequestHTTP Request“3.5”

?r

Service details pageon :ServiceX

HTTP ResponseHTTP Response


Usability questionnairesUsability questionnairesUsability survey about the Service-Finder portal

http://service-finder.cefriel.it/Average score: 73.3 (range: 0-100, average “good” values: 65-70)

ImplicitImplicit user feedbacksuser feedbacksPortal logs leads to insights on usage wrt the fruition modalities

A special kind of widgets logs users’ click stream

InternalInternal evaluationevaluation6 persons involved in the portal development

Flexibility and extendibility (beta approach)Missing “user-friendly” support to mapping

Evaluation Evaluation


Challenges and evolutions (1/2)Challenges and evolutions (1/2)Open Linked DataLinked Data movement and Linked Data Cloud

open and decentralizedopen and decentralized knowledge-intensive sources new links and connectionsnew links and connections emerge over timedata schemataschemata are never complete, but "fluidfluid" and possibly continuously changingchangingthe more the data grows, the easier to find data inconsistenciesinconsistencies

Challenge: presentingpresenting linked data to the human userto the human userLinked Data BrowsersLinked Data Browsers generic but with limited capabilitiesneed for a broader approach keeping into account the basic rules of Interaction Design to improve the usabilityimprove the usability of such tools


Challenges and evolutions (2/2)Challenges and evolutions (2/2)Challenge: unavailabilityunavailability of a completecomplete schemaschema of data to be displayed

define a "defaultdefault" visual representationrepresentationretrieveretrieve not only the (linked) data, but also their expected expected visualizationvisualization (metadata about the linked data), similarly to the vOIDvocabulary or the SPARQL endpoint Service Description

Challenge: editingediting and cleansingcleansing of linked data“collective intelligence”: engaging the final user in editingediting, correctioncorrection and enrichmentenrichmentlinked data are not enough, other context datacontext data are needed (e.g. source or timestamp)consequent challenges: what is the best and more natural way to present provenance or time informationpresent provenance or time information to the user? what are the correct interaction patterscorrect interaction patters to be employed to support user editing?

Towards the Formalization of Interaction SemanticsI-SEMANTICS – 6th International Conference on Semantic Systems – Graz, 1st-3rd September 2010 – © CEFRIEL 2010

Thanks for your attention! Any question?Towards the Formalization of Interaction Semantics

Paper Authors: Irene Celino, Francesco Corcoglioniti

Contact: Irene Celino – Semantic Web PracticeCEFRIEL – ICT Institute, Politecnico di Milanoemail: [email protected] – web: http://swa.cefriel.it

personal website: http://iricelino.orgphone: +39-02-23954266 – fax: +39-02-23954466

slides available at: http://www.slideshare.net/iricelino

towards the formalization of interaction semantics

Technology

web designers

data manager star

web structural

solutions web

web application definition

reuse data semantics

data managers

data detailstowards