Manipulating concept maps with constrained regions

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.
• 2: Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute. Hardy homepage, 1997. http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/~hardy.
• 3: R. Axelrod. Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1976.
• 4: Carlo Batini , Stefano Ceri , Shamkant B. Navathe, Conceptual database design: an Entity-relationship approach, Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1991
• 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.
• 6: Grady Booch, Object oriented design with applications, Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Redwood City, CA, 1990
• 7: G. Booch and J. Rumbaught. Unified Method for Object-Oriented Development Set. Rational Software Corporation, 1995.
• 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.
• 9: Luís Carriço , Nuno Guimarães, Facilitating Analysis and Diagnosis in Organisations, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, p.131-144, June 16-20, 1997
• 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.
• 11: Peter Coad , Edward Yourdon, Object-oriented analysis, Yourdon Press, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1990
• 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.
• 13: C. Ellis and J. Wainer. Goal-based models of collaboration. Collaborative Computing, 1:61--86, 1994.
• 14: B. Gaines and M. Shaw. Concept maps as hypermedia components. Knowledge Science Institute Home Page, 1995. http://ksi.cpsc.ucalgary.ca.
• 15: A. Huff. Mapping strategic thought. In A. Huff, editor, Mapping Strategic Thought. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1990.
• 16: Robert Carl Kremer , Brian R. Gaines, Constraint graphs: a concept map meta-language, 1997
• 17: M. Laukkanen. Comparative Cause Mapping of Management Cognitions. Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration, 1992.
• 18: R. Marshak. Workflow white paper: An overview of workflow software. In WORKFLOW '94 Conference Proceedings, San Jose, August 1994.
• 19: Raul Medina-Mora , Terry Winograd , Rodrigo Flores , Fernando Flores, The action workflow approach to workflow management technology, Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, p.281-288, November 01-04, 1992, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [doi>10.1145/143457.143530]
• 20: H. Mintzberg. Structure in Fives. Prentice-Hall, 1983.
• 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.
• 22: Franz Penz , Luís Carriço, Objects Feeling Objects in a MultiView Object Space, Proceedings of the Vienna Conference on Human Computer Interaction, p.25-36, September 20-22, 1993
• 23: J. Poras. Stream Analysis. Organization Development. Addison- Wesley, 1987.
• 24: R. Reger. Managerial thought structures and competitive positioning. In A. Huff, editor, Mapping Strategic Thought. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1990.
• 25: Lokendra Shastri , Lokenda Shastri, Semantic Networks: An Evidential Formalization and Its Connectionist Realization, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1987
• 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.
• 27: J. Sowa, editor. Principles of Semantic Networks: Explorations in the Representation of Knowledge. Morgan-Kaufman, San Mateo, California, 1991.
• 28: Visio. Visio homepage, 1997. http://www.visio.com.

INDEX TERMS

Keywords:
concept maps, direct manipulation, visual constraints, visual languages