theNetinthePark

7/31/2019 theNetinthePark

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thenetinthepark 1/9

ORIGINAL PAPER

The Net in the Park

Antonio Rizzo & Elisa Rubegni & Erik Grönval &

Maurizio Caporali & Andrea Alessandrini

Received: 10 November 2008 /Accepted: 3 February 2009 /Published online: 24 March 2009# Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009

Abstract Ubiquitous Computing, Pervasive Comput-

ing, Physical Computing, Everyware, Tangible User

Interface, and the Internet of Things all share the same

viewpoint — a viewpoint that sees computers, phones,

and game consoles as no longer being the only devices

in our environment deemed worthy to embody compu-

tation and be connected. Each of these approaches

focuses on slightly different aspects of the features and

potentialities of the enabling technologies (i.e., Physical

Computing focuses on the growing power of micro-

controllers; IOT on the increasing influence of taggingsystems; Everyware on the pervasiveness of the web

through wired and wireless connections, etc.) We

understand and place more emphasis on the similarities

then the differences among these approaches, and at the

same time, we try to address specific human activity

issues by exploiting these new enabling technologies

and visions. In the paper, we present a project, Wi-roni,

that addresses two issues: in-person communication and

the added value of being in a given location when

accessing a given content. To this end, we considered in

some detail the possibilities of three of these enabling

technologies: ultrasound sensors, MEMS, and mash-up

of Internet application. These technologies were chosen

based on the nature of the human activity, and not vice

versa. In Wi-roni, an Urban Architecture project located

in the La Gora public park in Monteroni d'Arbia, a small

village in the province of Siena (Italy), we developed

two interconnect solutions: Wi-wave, a column for

accessing web audio content in public spaces, and Wi-

swing, a children’s swing that tells stories while

swinging. These devices represent both the concretegrounds from which to begin to address the above-

mentioned human activity issues and the playground in

which to explore the new, emerging interaction

modalities that the enabling technologies could allow.

Keywords Ubiquitous Computing . Tangible

interface . Situated editing . Urban furniture

From Ubiquitous Computing to the Internet

of Things

Mark Weiser ’s vision (Weiser 1993) of digital

technology predicted the ubiquitous presence of

computing in the environment, with computers

integrated into everyday objects and becoming just

another part of the background. Ubiquitous Comput-

ing (Ubicomp) is striving to make this vision real,

producing invisible/transparent technology integrated

into the environment that allows a model of interac-

Know Techn Pol (2009) 22:51 – 59

DOI 10.1007/s12130-009-9067-y

A. Rizzo (*) : E. Rubegni : E. Grönval : M. Caporali :

A. Alessandrini

Communication Science Department, University of Siena,

Via Roma 56,

Siena 53100, Italy

e-mail: [email protected]

E. Rubegni

TEC-Lab, Università della Svizzera Italiana,

Via Buffi 13,

Lugano, Ticino 6900, Switzerland



tion based on physical manipulation of objects. This

approach modifies how people get in contact and

interact with their environments as well as the

activities that they can perform. Everyday objects,

once they are enhanced by embedded digital technol-

ogy, are not the same anymore, and neither are the

actions they enable. Tangible User Interface (TUI)(Ullmer and Ishii 2000) and Physical Computing

(O’Sullivan and Igoe 2004) paradigms focus on the

combination of physical and digital computation where

networked devices will be increasingly integrated

into the environment and will constitute the substrate

of what has been named Everyware (Greenfield

2006). The Internet of Things (IOT) combines the

power of Internet (contents and services) with

everyday objects empowered by sensing technologies

such as radiofrequency identification (RFID). RFID

tags can be embedded in any type of object, such as a shell (Mugellini et al. 2007), a stone (Rubegni et al.

2007), or a wooden stick (Caporali et al. 2005),

allowing these objects and their associated contents to

be connected. Sensors have the ability to detect the

physical status of things and to communicate any

changes. Thus, sensors collect data regarding the

environment, enabling objects to respond to changes

and raising awareness about their current context. For

example, the integration of local and global informa-

tion is a characteristic of Aware-Umbrella (Vazquez

and Lό pez de Ipiña 2008), an umbrella that mergescurrent weather information with Internet weather

forecasts and, when rain is imminent, advises the user

to bring it with him.

An interesting perspective is the connection of

these pervasive computational artifacts with Web 2.0

technologies and the opportunities they offer. Web 2.0

sees “Internet as a platform” (O'Reilly 2007) in the

sense that the second generation of Internet-based

services enable people to collaborate and share

information online and to be authors of contents

(such as blogs, social networking sites, wikis, andfolksonomies). Web 2.0 opens up opportunities for

increasing the power of computational objects and

devices not only in retrieving Internet contents but

also in enabling the production of content as well as

the creation of social/human networks. Indeed, this

area is as promising as it is as-yet unexplored.

Below, we present our perspective in designing

patterns of interaction in these emerging technology

domains. Our perspective will be exemplified through

the solutions developed in response to a specific

design need.

Our Perspective in Designing for Networked

and Computational Everyday Objects

We share the view that computers, phones, and game

consoles are no longer the only devices in our

environment deemed worthy of being “intelligent ”

and connected. But within this broad view of the

process of creating new objects and things, we want

to address two specific issues. First, most current

technology solutions take the user out of from the

physical and social context in which he is actually

involved — communication devices and data links are

seldom used to empower in-presence social activities.

Second, the development of most networked devices proposes the irrelevance of physical location as one of

the key advantages of being constantly connected. In

considering these two issues, we do not dispute the

utility of distance communication and any-place-any-

time accessibility to information; however, aligning

with the strategy of the Palcom project (Kyng et al.

2006; Brønsted et al. 2007), we seek to complement

these two crucial factors of ubiquitous computing

with their converse. We propose to respond to these

challenges by conceiving interaction modalities suitable

for social activities occurring in the here-and-now, inreal-time and real-place. Our goal is to develop design

solutions that mitigate or even eliminate the almost

compulsory estrangement from the physical context

when using communication technology. We challenge

information and communication technologies that allow

anytime-anywhere access to provide content that could

be enhanced by the fact of the user being in a given

location. Internet resources are barely affected by the

context in which the user accesses them — the content

and interaction modality remain the same irrespective of

physical location or cultural environment. For most webtechnologies, the specific location from which the user

accesses information adds nothing to the user ’s experi-

ence: whether the user is in New York, Hong Kong, or

the countryside near Siena does not seem to matter.

In facing the first of these challenges, we turn

mainly to TUI. This kind of device potentially enables

not only a reduction of the interaction gulf on both

sides (execution and evaluation) but also allows us to

design for patterns of behavior that could have

52 A. Rizzo et al.



aesthetic and imaginative value. This is an important

pre-requisite for allowing modes of interaction with

communication technologies that could be meaningful

on-site, and not only at a distance.

In response to the second challenge, we share

Marco Susani’s assumption that “information has no

meaning if it has no connection with material, publicspace, and if there is no mechanism for the social

sharing of information” (Susani 2005). But while he

proposes “to superimpose digital information onto the

social territory, creating an enriched and original

space for social interactions” based on the smart-tag

paradigm, we prefer to further develop the Situated

Editing (SE) principle, to which he also contributed in

the first phases of the POGO project. SE is, in our

view, a way “to allow a seamless integration of the

physical and virtual worlds through intuitive interac-

tion modalities”

(Rizzo et al. 2003). In SE, digitalassets are stored on physical media carriers or

transferred through wireless connections to specific

tools that receive privileged modalities of processing

and manipulation according to the tool at hand.

We introduced and dealt with these challenges in

Wi-roni, an interactive urban architecture project.

The Wi-roni Project

The Wi-roni project began as a response to the design brief issued by the municipality of Monteroni d’Ar-

bia, a small village near Siena. The main issue was to

facilitate the process of socialization in public spaces

among local citizens with special attention to chil-

dren, the elderly, and immigrants. We considered the

brief a very interesting opportunity to introduce and

experiment with solutions to our Ubicomp challenges:

(a) using distant communications to promote on-site,

in-presence communication and (b) making the

physical location have an impact on the fruition of

web content.

The Methodology

The design methodology was based on a co-

evolutionary process in which concept design, technol-

ogy design, and activity design were carried out

simultaneously so that each strand of the process could

inform the others (see Rizzo et al. 2003; Marti et al.

2005).

The first phase of the project was dedicated to user

studies and eliciting user requirements. The main

objective of the investigation was to identify needs

and opportunities that could foster the concept design

phase. From this perspective, it was important to

involve both citizens and municipality staff, applying

different techniques, including interviews, focusgroups, and ethnographic observation. Considering

the outcome of the user study and the suggestion from

stakeholders on the municipality staff, we decided to

focus on “La Gora ” park due to the presence of

outdoor activities that could change during the course

of the day and according to the range of people

present.

Concurrently with the user study, a technology

survey was conducted. This benchmarking aimed to

investigate available enabling technologies and to

gain inspiration from other urban projects. Theexploration focused mainly on interactive urban

furniture (benches, wall, public lighting, etc.), hard-

ware (e.g., sensors, RFID devices, Wi-Fi antennas,

MEMS, mash-up technology, etc.), and software

applications for accessing services and contents on the

web.

The third thread, concept generation, ran parallel to

the user and technology research, using input from the

user study to define brainstorming session issues and

input from the benchmarking segment to feeding the

sessions with inspirational material.Based on this research, a set of design concepts

was produced and subsequently organized into

scenarios in order to define the goals of the project

in a more concrete, narrative format ready to be

utilized and developed in various design phases

(Rizzo and Bacigalupo 2004). The strategy for

selecting among the proposed design concepts was

based on two principles: (1) progressive introduction

of devices and contents and (2) progressive intro-

duction of modes of interaction. The rationale behind

these principles concerned the need to becomeliterate in the use of digital technologies, especially

with respect to senior citizens, and the new behav-

iors we expected would be evoked by novel and

“social” modes of interaction. Thus, the initial period

of introduction of the Wi-roni devices should be

studied for its heuristic value as part of the overall

design process, and the lessons learned applied to the

same devices as well to the other design concepts

ready to be tested.

The net in the park 53



The following examples depict the first two of the

final concepts produced for Wi-roni: Wi-wave and

Wi-swing. We will illustrate them starting with the

narratives used for mock-up scenarios and moving

through to the working prototypes. In describing the

two design processes, for the sake of simplicity and

due to space limitations, we will focus on the aspectswe consider most relevant for producing the opera-

tional prototypes and modes of interaction, that is, the

dramatization of the scenarios performed by design-

ers, stakeholders, and users in varying and sometimes

random combinations. Thus, we will have to leave out

other aspects of the design process, including why and

how certain design decisions were made.

Wi-wave

Wi-wave is a device that aims to facilitate access toand interaction with web content in public spaces.

Many interface options were discussed and analyzed,

and designers and technicians worked to come up

with an artifact that could meet the needs determined

by our activity analysis and adapt to the physical

factors of the location 24 h a day, 7 days a week.

Thus, for the design of the first device, we focused on

audio content and gesture-based interaction. The

choice of sound as the first vehicle for content was

due to: (1) the immersive and pervasive nature of

sound; (2) its high compatibility with other concurrent activities; and, last but not least, (3) low risk of

accidental or voluntary damage to the device.

The choice of gesture-based interaction was con-

sidered a viable solution since: (1) it does not require

direct contact with the devices (responding to hygiene

and damage prevention needs); (2) it does not

interfere with the type of energy used to present the

content (audio), as voice interaction would; (3) it is

“ public” since it can be observed by others in its

various components (position and movement); (4) it

allows for easy turn-taking.Wi-wave uses ultrasonic sensor technology to

capture physical gestures as a navigation interface

for three channels of audio playback/streaming. The

content offered by Wi-wave is a collection of two

audio types: streaming radio and synchronized pod-

cast. The use of podcast is quite popular on the web

since the audio files are described through an XML

file (RSS feed) that standardizes the sharing of

periodically updated audio content over the Internet.

Wi-wave allows everyone to listen to podcasts in a

public area, and, from a research perspective, allows

us to explore issues regarding the design of interac-

tion through patterns of behavior that may have

aesthetic and imaginative value.

Wi-wave Scenarios

The following is an example of one of the narratives

used for mock-up scenarios:

Anna is a 30-year-old housewife living in Monter-

oni d'Arbia. Her daughter Luisa is 4 years old. Anna

takes Luisa to the park at 10:00 a.m., where they can

meet other mothers with their children. There is a

playground for children and benches for the adults.

Anna finds one of her friends in the park with her 5-

year-old daughter and sits next to her on the bench

while the girls run back and forth, playing together. After chatting for a while, the mothers call their

daughters back over. The girls are getting tired and

dirty from playing, so Anna asks them if they would

like to hear a fairytale. The girls like this idea quite a

bit, and Anna gets up and goes over to Wi-wave.

Anna raises her hand to activate the system. Luisa

runs over, smiling, and waves her hand in front of Wi-

wave to select the fairytale. Wi-wave says, “ Il

principe ranocchio…” (The Frog Prince). Luisa

makes an arc in the air, and Wi-wave says, “ Il leone

nella foresta…” (The Lion in the Forest). After a short jingle, the fairytale begins automatically: “ c'era

una volta…” (Once upon a time). Luisa runs back

over to her friend on the bench and sits to listen to the

story. Following the story, the children begin to mime

some crucial narration points, and their mothers now

and then join in the game. When the story is finished,

the mothers decide that it's time to prepare lunch, but

Luisa wants to listen again (thus the mother waves at

Wi-wave in order to produce the Goodbye jingle).

They say goodbye to their friends; Luisa waves

goodbye to Wi-wave, and she and Anna head back home.

This and other scenarios drove the design of mock-

ups of the first Wi-roni devices. The mock-up activity

was a creative session in which we defined the

content to be presented and explored possible shapes

for the artifact. First, rough mock-ups were built to be

tested and refined quickly. In an early phase, mock-

ups were made using cardboard and paper, as they

were easy to cut and shape into forms in which the

54 A. Rizzo et al.



sensors could be embedded. Those mock-ups were

almost interactive: sensors were connected to a

computer and activated the first versions of the

software application being developed concurrently.

The second and third generations of mock-ups and

prototypes were built using more suitable materials

and technology, as we needed to refine the shape andthe set of gestures suitable for the sensors.

Each mock-up was evaluated in the laboratory with

end users, and based on the findings of user testing

(dramatization sessions based on the scenarios), the

artifact was refined and improved. Evaluation was

based on qualitative and exploratory tests that were

videotaped in order to document the study and

thoroughly analyze users’ behavior and gestures.

Evaluators asked the testers to play a given role and

perform a certain task using the artifact without

clarifying how to use the interface; users wereencouraged to explore and discover how to use the

device, or even to propose an interaction pattern.

The evaluation of the first generation of mock-ups

(see Fig. 1) aimed to refine the set of intentional

gestures, determine the position and sensitivity dis-

tance of the sensors to avoid unintentional interaction,

and observe the group dynamics created around the

device as a social focal point.

The lexicon and syntax of the gesture-based

interaction emerged through the elaboration of spon-

taneous gestures and adaptation of the physicalartifact to these natural gestures. The data gathered

in tests done with the first mock-up provided

sufficient information for refining the design and

moving forward with development of more interactive

prototypes.

The second generation of prototypes changed

significantly in terms of shape and modes of

interaction. A vertical pillar-like structure was used,in which the sensors were embedded into the edge of

a circular shape at the top of the central structure. The

first evaluation session immediately revealed the

stronger appeal of this version compared to the pre-

vious one. In fact, in front of the wall mock-up, many

users had tried to push the sensors, clearly perceived

as buttons, while the vertical structure attracted users

who, in the majority of cases (about 65%), found the

correct way to turn on the system and interact with it.

The second prototype suggested a clearer concep-

tual model providing the affordance necessary for public installation. With the second mock-up, we also

tested cooperative use of the system, inviting groups

of users to interact with Wi-wave and attempt to

access its audio content (see Fig. 2).

The third generation of prototypes and the evalu-

ation outcomes provided the basis for defining the

final prototype. This prototype was built in collabo-

ration with two architects who designed the final

structure (Fig. 3). The final prototype was evaluated

by end users, including children ages 8 – 12. The

evaluation of the final prototype revealed manyinteresting aspects mainly regarding the mode of

interaction, which changed significantly depending

on the shape of the structure.

Fig. 1 One of the first mock-ups with the shape of a wall and

three channels Fig. 2 Second mock-up evaluation with a group




These laboratory tests were considered sufficient to

support the initial installation of Wi-wave; the types

of behavior we could induce in the lab had beenexhausted, and at that point only field testing would

allow us to identify issues for fine-tuning or deter-

mine the need for radical changes. The Wi-wave

component (see Fig. 4) is currently composed of three

sensors, a microcontroller, and a computer, which

runs the custom software developed as part of the

project.

Wi-swing

Wi-swing is a tool for listening to storytelling and,more in general, for broadcasting the output of Wi-

wave (Fig. 5). Wi-swing is principally dedicated to

children, who make up its privileged user class. They

can browse contents and control the speed of the

narrative through the movements of the swing. The

first mock-ups we built were based on the following

scenario.

Wi-swing Envisioning Scenario

Livia is spending her free afternoon with her twodaughters Alessia and Martina at La Gora Park.

After running about a bit, Alessia and Martina ask

Livia to go to Wi-wave so that they can listen to the

stories they have selected on the Wi-roni website, but

at the Wi-wave column there are already some people

listening to podcasts on the issue of the day — the

relationship between Carla Bruni and French Presi-

dent Sarkozy — who seem quite intent on continuing to

listen. Livia suggests the children go to Wi-swing to

listen to the stories. Alessia and Martina immediately

run to the Wi-swing and turn the seat to activate the storytelling feature. Alessia sits on the swing and as

soon as it begins to oscillate regularly the narrative

starts. Martina pushes Alessia on the swing while

listening, and at a certain point the swing goes so

high that the narrator ’ s voice becomes strangled.

Fig. 3 The Architect building the final prototype

Fig. 4 System diagram

Fig. 5 Image of the Wi-swing model and mock-up

56 A. Rizzo et al.



Martina and Alessia laugh while Livia tells them to be

more careful and quieter. The story ends and Martina

and Alessia switch positions to listen to another story.

The next one is full of songs that the girls want to sing

together, so they stop the swing and ask their mother

to push as they share the swing seat, enjoying and

participating in the narration.The Wi-swing concept was refined in the mock-up

session, during which we assessed enabling technol-

ogy (MEMS sensors) and patterns of interaction. We

separately tested MEMS sensors connected to a

personal computer that communicated via USB cable

with a development kit (ST microelectronics MEMS

development kit). At the same time, we developed

mock-ups using cardboard and wood.

Rough mock-ups were built to explore the Wi-

swing concept, and the first generations were not

interactive. Production of the first mock-ups beganwith the development of a scale model (1:10) to allow

us to understand the basic physics behind the Wi-

swing concept. Utilizing the model, we explored the

motion properties and swing dynamics: the swing

works like a pendulum, and three fundamental

properties played important roles in the development

of the Wi-swing concept (oscillation, oscillation limit ,

potential swing seat torsion).

Constructing the model (see Fig. 6) gave us many

insights regarding patterns of interaction and the

potential of the swing’s physical properties. To further

elaborate on the concept and the interaction possibil-

ities, we dramatized the mock-up scenario (see Rizzoand Bacigalupo 2004) so as to allow the material

properties of the mock-up involved in the interaction

(Bertelsen et al. 2008) to further enhance the Wi-swing

concept and its modes of interaction. We organized a

workshop with end users that informed the design

process with new information on how the system

should react to specific input and, more importantly,

what input would generate a specific system behavior.

This dramatization led to the following conclusions:

(1) when one track or podcast ends, the swing should

be in a ‘rest

’position before launching the next tune.

After 120 s of no-swing within the play range, Wi-

swing goes into stand-by. (2) If the swing stops in the

middle of a podcast, it should continue from where it

stopped if the swing is reactivated within 90 s. (3) To

fast-forward within a specific track, the swing should

be pushed forward and halted in that position. While

Fig. 6 Image of Wi-roni system: Wi-wave and Wi-swing




the swing remains in that position, the podcast

advances at double speed. Once it reaches the end, if

the position continues to be held, Wi-swing moves

from one podcast to the next, producing the audio withthe story title until the seat is returned to the vertical

position. (4) If the swing is pushed backwards and

remains in that position, the podcast will be re-winded

at double speed until the swing returns to the original

‘rest ’ position. Again, if the backward position is held,

Wi-swing moves from one podcast to another.

These system and interaction characteristics

evolved from our dramatization of mock-up scenar-ios. The results we obtained might seem obvious and

simple once presented, but we would not have been

able to produce these interaction patterns without the

drama-workshop. Situated ‘acting’ or play is a

powerful instrument that allowed us to try out and

validate modes of interaction without having the full

system available.

The Wi-roni Back-end

Updating of the data provided through Wi-roni sets(Figs. 6 and 7) can be done by introducing and

managing content on the web site (http://www.saul.

unisi.it/wironi) (see Fig. 8). The web site is a Content

Management System (CMS) powered by Drupal

technology. It is organized to allow a distributed

workflow for managing and publishing content through

the Wi-roni sets. It is also set up to accept content

produced by Wi-roni tools once they are implemented

and made available to people in the Park. In addition to

the CMS, there is also a Wi-roni Web application

manager, which dynamically connects Wi-roni tools inthe park with Web content through Web Services.

Fig. 7 A picture of the final prototype

Fig. 8 A screenshot of

the website back-end: an

example of the Web inter-

face used to manage the

Story Podcast

58 A. Rizzo et al.

http://www.saul.unisi.it/wironi






Conclusions

The two proposed challenges — complementing distant

communication with in-presence communication and

bringing “everyware” into harmony with the specific

value of a given location — open up perspectives that

will take some time to explore and fully understand interms of their implications. They provide an opportu-

nity to create innovative services and products with

current enabling technologies, and offer the possibility

to address socio-technical issues from a new perspec-

tive. Today, most current web services and the related

tools available to access them are “ private”, both in the

sense that they are conceived to be used mainly by

individuals and in the sense that they are operated in a

privately owned space.

In the Wi-roni project, we exploited two main

technical mechanisms characteristic of Web 2.0: RichInternet Applications and mash-ups combined with

sensors, coupled with new or existing physical

devices so as to increase the options and possibilities

users have in using web information in a public space.

We also worked towards making modes of interaction

public both in the sense that they are carried out

without any personal devices and in the sense that

they are open to dialogical modes of operation with

others.

Moving in this direction means making the user ’s

location equally as important as the web services,and the two should harmonize in order to produce

the ideal combination through the added value

offered by the second side of this binominal (web

service/location). To better explain the intent, we can

use the metaphor of water distribution as a stand-in

for the Internet: water should be in any location

where we want life, but it is a matter of human

cultural design whether to have a simple tap or to

build a fountain.

From the point of view of interaction design,

designing a fountain requires an effort beyond that which is necessary for designing a washing machine or

any other industrialized object. Any “fountain” is

unique, and its modes of interaction should be unique

as well, as they will become part of the aesthetic and

imaginative values of the “service and location”

product. Thus, the choreography generated by the

emerging behavior of people involved in new and

traditional convivial activities will become a value in

itself. This is one of the peculiarities of looking at the

interaction modalities through the lens of Situated

Editing.

References

Bertelsen W. O., Grönvall E., Rizzo A.(2008) Mockup’ing as a creative dialog with and through material. Abstract in the

Proceedings of ISCAR 2008, Ecologies of Diversities: San

Diego, September 8 – 13, 2008

Brønsted, J., Grönvall E., Svensson D. (2007) Palpability

support demonstrated. In Proceedings of the 2007 IFIP

International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous

Computing. 2007, December 10 – 13, Taipei, Taiwan.

Caporali, M., Rizzo, A., Rubegni, E. (2005) Interacting by

meaningful actions in G. Salvendy (ed.) Human Computer

International 2005. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Greenfield, A. (2006) Everyware: The Dawning of Ubiquitous

Computing. Indianapolis: New Riders.

Kyng, M., Nielsen, E.T., Kristensen, M. (2006) Challenges indesigning interactive systems for emergency response. In

Proceedings of DIS'06, ACM, (2006), pp. 301 – 310.

O’Sullivan, D., and Igoe, T. (2004) Physical Computing.

Boston: Thompson.

Marti, P., Bacigalupo, M., Moderini, C., Rizzo, A. (2005)

Design for innovation in ATM. Proceedings of the 6th

USA/Europe Seminar on Air Traffic Management Re-

search and Development. Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Bretigny: Eurocontrol Digital.

Mugellini, E., Rubegni, E., Gerardi, S., Khaled, O. (2007):

Using personal objects as tangible interfaces for memory

recollection and sharing. In: Proceedings of the 1st

International Conference on Tangible and Embedded

Interaction 2007. pp. 231 –

238.O'Reilly, T. (2007) Web 2.0 Compact Definition: Trying Again.

Retrieved on 2007-01-20.

Rizzo, A., Bacigalupo, M. (2004) Scenarios: heuristics for actions.

In D.J. Reed, G. Baxter, M. Blythe (eds.) Proceedings of XII

European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. York:

EACE.

Rizzo, A., Marti, P., Decortis F., Rutgers, J., and Thursfield P.

(2003). POGO world. In M.A. Blythe, A.F. Monk, K.

Overbeeke, P.C. Wright (eds.), Funology: From Usability

to Enjoyment. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 1 – 12.

Rubegni, E., Gerardi, S., Caporali, M. (2007) Mobile application

for helping users to keep track of their travel experience.

Proceedings of the ECCE2007 Explore! Invent! Conference

on Cognitive Ergonomics, 28 – 31 August 2007, London, UK.Susani, M. (2005) Interaction contextualized in space. Inter-

actions 12, 4, 50 – 54.

Ullmer, B, Ishii, H. (2000) Emerging frameworks for tangible

user interfaces. IBM Systems Journal , 39, 915 – 931.

Vazquez, J. I., López de Ipiña, D. (2008) Social devices:

autonomous artifacts that communicate on the Internet,

Internet of Things 2008. First International Conference, IOT

2008, Zurich, Switzerland, March 26 – 28, 2008, Proceedings.

Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 4952.

Weiser, M. (1993) Ubiquitous computing. Computer, Commu-

nication of the ACM , 26, 71 – 72


theNetinthePark

Documents