Embedding Hypermedia into Information Systems Harri Oinas-Kukkonen Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu FIN-90570 Oulu, Finland E-mail:
[email protected]
Abstract This paper discusses the integration of hypermedia as a value-added support functionality into computer-based information systems. These include a large base of scientific and business applications, which people use primarily for their underlying analytic functionality. Hypermedia features supplement these applications, providing access to the application's primary activities, and support for the understanding of information and communication between team members. This paper presents a topography for the emerging hypermedia functionality research in general. It also illustrates one branch of this research with an example: an information system level functionality within a software system with the emphasis on hand-made hyperlinks and annotations.
1. Introduction The hypermedia functionality approach [1, 2] focuses on incorporating hypermedia features into non-hypermedia systems so as to provide their users with an associative way 1 of accessing, analysing and organising information. The perceived benefits of adding hypermedia functionality into information system applications are formulated using three conjectures: 1. Hypermedia functionality provides a contextual, navigational access to information. 2. The hypermedia representation of knowledge is in a form that is relatively close to the organizational structures that people use, thus supporting human understanding. 3. Hypermedia provides a natural means for supporting communication between different stakeholders, e.g. authors and readers. These may also result in the support of individual and organizational learning, and promote the growth of organizational memory. Because hypermedia functionality 1
The term hypermedia is utilized here to refer to the underlying linking and annotation capabilities rather than multimedia features. The terms hypertext and hypermedia may be used interchangeably.
(HMF) mostly relates to less tangible benefits, such as user satisfaction and perceived usefulness, it is only after the development, intensive use, and experience gathering of a number of applications that the impact of HMF can really be measured. Hypermedia functionality is beneficial in a variety of management information systems, decision support systems or other end-user oriented computer-based information systems [3, 4]. These kind of systems may also include e.g. software development, documentation, or electronic mail applications [5]. Some software systems already exist, which have some basic hypermedia features (e.g. World Wide Web browsers, Windows help systems, or Microsoft Word), providing simple annotating, bookmarking and linking capabilities. For many of these systems, hypermedia is integrated so seamlessly that users are unaware of its explicit presence. Even these systems, which may have limited hypermedia capabilities, can be remarkably enhanced through the presence of hypermedia functionality [6]. However, most end-users are reluctant to abandon their current non-hypermedia oriented systems in favour of hypermedia features. Thus, the myriad of today's personal, scientific and business applications, which were not designed specifically as hypermedia-oriented, must be augmented with hypermedia features. This results in new ways to view the information provided by the system, such as enhancing knowledge with annotations and dependencies, navigating among nodes in different stages of system use, and coupling information representation to users’ tasks. Even if the HMF research has its roots in the hypertext research community [7], in particular in the development of hypertext or hypermedia systems, the approach is inherently different from developing hypermedia-based systems from scratch. Hypermedia functionality dictates a set of attributes that enable the hypermedia features in computer-based information systems and their specified properties. HMF on the other hand is a desired functionality of information systems that supports the relating of knowledge or pieces of it to each other in an associative manner. The key
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
hypermedia features comprise linking, annotation and navigation capabilities as a seamless part of the information system. The approach emphasizes the added value given to the information system, making it more flexible to use or adapting it to its users. Thus, the legitimation of hypermedia functionality depends finally upon the endusers of the system. Hypermedia functionality integration tries to preserve the existing semantics and behaviour of the information system. Basically, the material already contained in an information system is utilized as a node collection, being organized according to the associations perceived by the authors or readers. Authors and readers may also add annotations into the information collection. This paper investigates the state of art of incorporating hypermedia functionality into computer-based information systems. The paper is organized as follows. First, a topography of current research is presented. Second, a central issue of link creation is discussed. Third, two implementation approaches (information system and operating system levels) are addressed. Fourth, an implementation of an information system level functionality with emphasis on hand-made hyperlinks and annotations is given. Finally, the contributions are summarized and discussed, and new emerging issues are addressed by outlining a research agenda for future research.
HMF as a method to investigate systems
Information system
HMF as a technology to enhance systems
Figure 1. A two-fold hypermedia functionality approach There exists two different approaches to the utilization of HMF as a technological solution for developing or enhancing information systems, namely data and software retrofitting. See Figure 2.
HMF research
2. HMF research topography A two-fold hypermedia functionality approach is described in Figure 1, comprising a method to investigate information systems and a technology to enhance information systems. Most research so far has focused on viewing HMF as a technology for developing systems (see e.g. [8, 9]), but the utilization of HMF as a method to investigate systems has gained more interest lately. One possibility is the use of hypermedia application design methodologies [10, 11] in the early phases of systems analysis and design, in particular investigating the relationships between information items. A very interesting future research direction is the development of HMF as a supplemental method in conjunction with object-oriented or structured methodologies when developing information systems. This research direction has its basis on the general information system development methodology research, but it is also connected to hypermedia design methodologies and other general purpose hypertext data models [12, 13].
HMF as a method to investigate systems
HMF as a technology to enhance systems
* HMF as an analysis method
Data retrofitting
Software retrofitting
* data standards
* hand-made vs. automatic link creation * IS-level vs. OS-level HMF
Figure 2. Main HMF research streams Data retrofitting implies the use of data standards for the (re)structuring of data, e.g. SGML, HTML, or HyTime [14]. Many large organizations (e.g. publishing companies or other firms with very large information bases) are interested in this approach due to its potential strategic benefit for the organization in managing a vast collection of
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
information over a long period of time. These standards have emerged relatively recently and are probably unsuitable for data archaeology with heterogeneous databases created and (un)maintained during the past 20 or 30 years. Software retrofitting means a change of software components to provide the desired software system features. It includes a great number on research issues, for example when to create links by hand or generate them automatically, and whether to focus on enhancing an application (or suite of applications) or providing a general linking mechanism between any third-party applications. Thus, software retrofitting of hypermedia functionality with legacy systems poses a particular challenge to software engineers.
3. Hand-made and computed links Hypermedia functionality allows links between related pieces of knowledge, but the key question is still how the links are created. There are basically two ways to build links, namely by hand or by computing. See Figure 3.
Hand-made
By Hand
Dynamic
Precomputed
By Computing
Figure 3. Different kinds of link creation There are two kinds of computed links: dynamic and precomputed links. Dynamic links are generated through 2 the reader triggering the link building, either with conscious selection or unconsciously, e.g. by entering into a certain node. When dealing with structured or hierarchical hypermedia, links can be precomputed relatively easily. Nodes and links may reflect the inherent structure of the application, the benefit being that the user interface of the system can be represented as hypertext. The limitation of this approach is that links are directly mapped to relationships determined in the conceptual model, thereby not providing much additional information of worth. Applications in which component and relationship types are easily recognizable can benefit a great deal from automatic link generation. On the other hand, users often 2
In our terminology, all users, i.e. both authors and readers, are capable of creating links and annotations. There are no separate modes for ”read-only” and ”write” access rights.
prefer to organize the knowledge in a more flexible and informal way, without being restricted to ”pre-defined” nodes and links. Given the highest degree of flexibility, software system users (both authors and readers) can place links from any component or group of components in a document into other documents at will by hand. In this approach the emphasis is to represent additional information, which would not exist otherwise in the information system. It is also only hand-made links, which allow hand-made annotations. Thus, applications with a lot of analytical information and heavy end-user emphasis may benefit from hand-made links in particular. We believe that both ways of link creation are useful in various application domains. Consider a CASE tool as an example application. Automatic links may be generated between the documents of each pre-defined phase of a certain methodology. Hand-made links support annotation capability (e.g. design rationale discussions) and free association of components by authors and readers.
4. Information system and operating system levels The actual links represent connections between documents or parts of documents), which may be created and managed by different information systems. This leads to a number of questions: Should an information system be able to link to/from documents created within a single application only? Or to/from documents created with any other application? Or to/from documents managed by applications in other software and hardware platforms? The two key approaches in the hypermedia functionality research can be called information system level hypermedia functionality (IS-level-HMF) and operating system level hypermedia functionality (OS-level-HMF). • Information system level hypermedia functionality aims at providing the desired capabilities within a single application (or a suite of applications). • Operating system level hypermedia functionality aims at providing a means to link documents managed by different applications, even any third-party applications which do not know of each other’s existence. The term ”level” emphasizes here the type of functionality, in particular from an end-user viewpoint, and it is not dependent on how they are technically implemented. From the end-user viewpoint the functionality may be provided either at the information systems level or at the operating systems level. From the system developer viewpoint both of these levels are (in most cases) implemented as an external set of functions with an application programming interface. Both IS-levelHMF and OS-level-HMF approaches have their advantages
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
and disadvantages, and can be used for a successful integration of hypermedia functionality into nonhypermedia systems. These terms should be seen as descriptive, instead of fully exclusive, showing the emphasis in each case. Most of the OS-level-HMF (or open hypermedia systems) research is focused on developing link engines, enabling the linking of documents created with different applications (in principle any applications), e.g. Microcosm [15], or Chimera [16]. These applications need to be aware of the hypermedia functionality, via application linking interfaces, e.g. OLE (Object Linking and Embedding), CGI (Common Gateway Interface) and CCI (Common Client Interface), and notification mechanisms. These addressing schemes are fundamental in the incorporation of data from any source. This is a key reason for the success of World Wide Web, having a simple but effective scheme for a wide-area network.
4.1. When to use each approach? As noted earlier, information system level functionality and operating system level functionality are not entirely exclusive. From the point of view of the information system level, operating system level functionality enables external links from the documents in the information system to those in another system, and an operating system can be considered a special case of an information system. Conversely, from the point of view of the operating system level, information system level functionality can be considered a special case of linking from a document in one information system to a document in another (being actually the same system). There is, however, a great difference in the emphasis given by each of the approaches, both having their advantages and disadvantages. In research-wise, IS-level-HMF and OS-level-HMF have very diversified goals. Even if they share common problems, IS-level-HMF is oriented towards applying hypermedia for different problem domains (”information systems view”), while OS-level-HMF emphasizes more the technical or implementational aspects (”computer science ”view”). Commercially speaking, IS-level-HMF is of interest for a great number of information system developers and software vendors, who can market their own products via the hypermedia capabilities, and the perceived flexibility given by them. Many information system users and user organizations are in favor of these features. OS-level HMF is of great interest to operating system developers. Naturally, very large software houses or governmental offices are also interested in it as user organizations. Thus there are fewer explicit “customers” in this approach, but they are generally bigger in size.
We believe that IS-level-HMF should be the preference or default solution for developing the functionality into software systems, and OS-level-HMF the back-up solution. First and foremost, it should be noted that IS-level-HMF can provide a means for sophisticated, fine-grained and domain-oriented solutions, which may result into new business value through software product differentiation. Even when HMF exists at the OS-level, IS-level-HMF may be needed for various domain-oriented or business reasons. Secondly, the use of IS-level-HMF in the products of a single software house, means freedom from dependency on other vendors, particularly concerning the operating system vendors’ willingness to develop and maintain the HMF. Thirdly, most end-users tend to work at the IS-level only, that is they do not use (or do not wish to use) many resources for systems integration. There are however some disadvantages at the IS-levelHMF. To learn to use IS-level-HMF (which may be different in each application) may mean longer learning curves, the performance may be lower with more complex structures, and it may be more expensive to develop ISlevel-HMF than just use an existing OS-level-HMF for an information system (if such an OS-level-HMF just exists). When operating systems really support HMF, the OSlevel-HMF advantages may become quickly evident through the relative ease of integration of existing tools, and possible re-engineering of legacy systems. However, many questions remain to be solved. Firstly, the linkages between third-party applications are probably not seamless. Secondly, the maintenance of linkages at the OS-levelHMF, in particular in wide-area-networks or interorganization linkages are tricky. Thirdly, pure OS-levelHMF would need standards for addressing schemes. Currently it is unlikely that these will emerge through working committees’ decisions, but rather as de-facto standards. Fourthly, it is often not possible to customize existing operating systems, which lack the HMF, and it would prove inpracticable for each software house to develop their own operating system. In the longer run a significant part of the hypermedia functionality will probably be generalized into the operating systems [17], a set of application domain specific features being customized or implemented at the information system level. In fact, the ultimate goal of OSlevel-HMF is to have a pure hypermedia operating system [18]. Even though research attempts towards this have started, operating system developers will probably provide hypermedia functionality only when a critical mass of information system level hypermedia functionality implementations exist. If operating system vendors will not provide the desired HMF, it may mean that growth of defacto standards through free distribution, as in the cases of
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
the WWW browser Mosaic or Linux operating system shell, may impact the arena.
5. Case: information system level HMF Seamless support for integrating software descriptions is one of the key requirements for advanced systems development. Design tools can be greatly increased in power by hypermedia functionality, which provides tool users with smooth transfer possibilities through the dependencies between design diagrams or parts of them. This section discusses the prominent hypermedia features required for accomplishing this and describes a hypermedia functionality implementation in a Computer-Aided Software/Systems Engineering (CASE) environment. Linking Ability (L.A.) is the hypermedia functionality behind the model editing and argumentation tools of the MetaEdit+ CASE environment [19] such as Diagram Editor, Matrix Editor, Table Editor, or Debate Browser. Basically, it enables the attachment of hyperlinks and annotations to any design objects in diagrams or to any text strings in text nodes. The reader can traverse a hyperlink to reach its target by activating the link (a symbol or hotword). The linking, annotation, and navigation features (i.e. the core functionality) are described next, followed by an example and discussion of the features.
5.1. Linking features Existing documents can be linked together using two kinds of hyperlink: association or traceability links. Association links provide connections between two documents, between parts of documents, or between a part of a document and a whole document. Links of this kind allow the representation of associative connections between various parts of documents to be supported. The name traceability link emphasizes the possibility of tracing back to the original development requirements. One of the most important benefits of document integration performed in a hypermedia-like manner is that it is possible to show the relations between software components relatively easily. Traceability links support the representation of dependencies between system development phases, the refinement of objects over time, or other semantic traces.
5.2. Annotation features The addition of annotations and the representation of their connections to the original documents takes place through annotation and debate links. Annotation links provide a way of connecting new nodes to documents or design objects in documents. An annotation in itself is a brief, informal record (text or other media). Annotation links allow support for the connecting of informal information to formal information. This is one way for a CASE environment to support the refinement of concept definitions or the recording of experience over time, which is crucial for software project success. The name debate link emphasizes design rationale [20, 21], which is basically a conversation among developers in which they bring their expertise and viewpoints to bear on resolving design issues. Design rationale nodes are typed into question, answer or argument nodes, and they may have specific interrelationships with other design rationale nodes [22]. In a similar manner design rationale nodes may include review information. Debate links integrate argumentation into design documents.
5.3. Navigation features When the non-linear dimension of navigation is added to documents, the complexity of the relationships grows rapidly. One possible disadvantage of hypermedia is the problem of getting lost in the hyperdocument. To avoid this a variety of navigational aids have been implemented for Linking Ability users. Firstly, different link types are represented in the diagrams with unique symbols and colours, and in texts with underlinings and colours. Secondly, all hyperlinks can have attributes associated with them to provide more information. Link attributes also provide the user with a way of previewing the target before activating a hyperlink. The attributes include a name and label for the link, creator of the link, date and time of creation, textual description, and subtype and keyword definition. One of the novel features of Linking Ability is its support for link customization by means of subtypes and keywords. A project manager can define link classifications of different kinds, consisting of a set of subtypes. As an example, an annotation link could be subtyped as a ‘convergent’ or ‘divergent’ link, or if the project uses an object-oriented methodology, the traceability links might be subtyped into ‘requirements-OOA’, ‘OOA-OOD’, and ‘OOD-code’. The link creator can choose the proper link subtype from among a set defined by the project manager. Keywords are ‘terms’ which can be attached to hyperlinks. They overlap with subtyping in functionality, but serve a different function semantically, in that there is no limit to
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
how many keywords can be attached to a hyperlink. Project members may also be allowed to define keywords, e.g. to describe link importance or alternative solutions. Many hypertext systems provide a node-based text string search facility, similar that of the Linking Ability, but they lack a structure-based query. This is where the payback comes for defining attributes for hyperlinks: the link attribute query facility. A document reader (e.g. a project manager, a reviewer, another systems designer, or the designer himself, who, having been involved in creating the documentation, is now reading it later) may want to find all of the project’s traceability hyperlinks to which the keyword ‘important’ is attached. When the query is executed he receives a hit list consisting of the links that fulfill the requirements stated in the query and can backtrack or follow any of these. Even though hyperlinks are one-directional in our implementation, effective navigation and unlimited backtracking is supported by various kinds of link lists. The interaction history enables a user to view his/her own footprints during earlier reading of the hyperdocument, and it is supported by a hyperlink history list, which contains the links the user has activated during the current session. Both authoring and reading (i.e. link creation and link traversing) are interpreted as link activation. The hyperlink history has the advantage of being able to either follow a link to its target or backtrack to its source, while a node history would enable only backtracking to the node. Most current hypertext systems support the node history approach only. Like link attribute query results, the hyperlinks that target an active document or have one as their source are listed as incoming and outgoing link lists. Links whose targets have been deleted without themselves being deleted are listed as dangling links so that users can recognize the possible inconsistency. All hyperlink lists show the link type, name, creator and date and time of creation. The lists are also provided with a possibility to sort the links according to creator and timestamp of creation, filter in terms of link types, view the link attributes, and follow and backtrack the links. In addition to hyperlinks, some ”marks” having conventional meanings and used in place of words, or to represent a complex notion can be attached to the documents. Two kinds of mark are provided: a bookmark and a landmark. A bookmark is a marker for keeping one's place in the collection of documents, and can be attached to e.g. a specific design object in a document which might be of interest at a later date, for example, while a landmark is a conspicious object in a document that directs the user towards a place or identifies it, e.g. an important region in the documentation. Their semantic difference is that while a bookmark is meant to be personal, a landmark is meant to
be informative for all users. Bookmarks and landmarks are ‘dummy links’ in the sense, that they do not actually link their source to any other document or piece of document. Their existence in documents is their sole function. Like hyperlink lists, bookmarks and landmarks can be listed and backtracked to their sources. Other sophisticated navigation support features in Linking Ability include filtering and composite link structures. As the hypermedia functionality simply adds value to the documentation, it is possible to read a document without the links using a filtering mechanism. The hyperlinks that are attached to the same design object can be grouped into a fat link for representational purposes, and the activation of a fat link gives a menu of the links contained in it (cf. hyperlink history list), from which individual links can then be activated.
5.4. An example Often the support of information system development methodologies for representing dependencies between design documents is not enough, because the authors and readers should be able to create associative connections at will. The incorporation of hypermedia functionality into design tools has a great potential for bridging this gap. Hypermedia functionality provides software system users with a means to explore and navigate among diagrams according to the associations perceived by their authors or readers. Hypermedia functionality as a valueadding feature implies that the material already contained in a diagram can be used as a collection of nodes, the associative connections between which are represented to the users via links. Users do not have to create any new nodes in order to utilize this functionality if they do not want to. In many cases, however, authors and readers want to add some information to the diagrams, i.e. to generate new nodes, and this is enabled via an annotation mechanism which allows material (text or other media) to be added to the body of a diagram. Figures 4 and 5 provide an illustration of how the incorporation of core functionality can enhance an existing 3 document-intensive information system.
3
For another example see [23] in this proceedings.
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
Requirements document RD1
Analysis document AD1
Design document DD1
Program Document PD1
Req1. The sys tem has to be able to list all the links ... Req2. The sys
follow "add self to a LAStore link self updateF ^selfopen
Figure 4. Original documents Figure 4 shows a requirements document (RD1), an analysis document (AD1), a design document (DD1), and a piece of code in a program document (PD1) created with different CASE tools. There are, of course, dependencies between documents, which are supported by the methodologies per se, but for a sophisticated support of the semantic connections between parts of the documents in the reader’s and author's minds, hypermedia functionality is needed. Often CASE tool users can just open different documents in different windows, but can not create or represent the connections between associated documents or parts of them at will.
Requirements document RD1
Hypermedia functionality provides tools with powerful means for supporting the connections of related design objects via simple node and link structure. It is a key feature for achieving a high degree of modelling transparency in CASE tools [24]. Now, when hypermedia functionality is incorporated into the tool the same documents can be accessed in a new manner, by following system-supported dependencies and reading the annotations. See Figure 5. Representation of the dependencies is taken care of by link markers, which can be represented to the users e.g. as symbols attached to design objects in graphical representations or hotwords in textual representations.
Analysis document AD1 AN1 ........
Req1. The sys Traceability tem has to be link T1 able to list all the links ... Req2. The sys
Annotation link N1 Annotation node Association link A2
Association link A1
QN1 Debate link D1
Traceability link T2
Decision AR2
AR1 Design document DD1
follow "add self to a LAStore link self updateF ^selfopen Program Document PD1
+ AT1
-
+ AT2
AT3
Design rationale nodes
Figure 5. Resulting hyperdocuments
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
The association link A1 connects the document RD1 to document AD1, and the association link A2 connects a design object in document AD1 to a design object in document DD1. Similarly there could be connections from a document to an object in the same or another document. A special kind of an association link is a link to a document (or part of it), which is created with other applications than the CASE environment includes, e.g. a word processing document, a spreadsheet, or a multimedia document. The traceability link T1 relates an original development requirement in document RD1 to a specific design solution in document DD1, and the traceability link P2 connects a design object in document DD1 to it’s implementation in document PD1. The target of the annotation link N1, which is attached to an object in the analysis document AD1, is the textual annotation AN1. The target of the debate link D1, which is attached to a design object in document DD1, is a design rationale node ‘question’ QN1. The question has two ‘answers’, AR1 and AR2, which have a total of three ‘arguments’, AT1, AT2 and AT3, which either support or oppose to an answer. The argument AT1 supports the answer AR1, the argument AT2 at the same time objects to the answer AR1, but supports the answer AR2, and the argument AT3 objects to the answer AR2. After a discussion between the stakeholders one of the suggested answers may be selected as a decision for the question.
5.5. Discussion Even if Linking Ability supports and integrates various tools within a single environment, it is regarded as IS-levelHMF, while the end-user normally regards the whole environment as a single information system. To summarize and generalize, the key features of Linking Ability include the following: • node and link types, • link attributes, • link directionality, • annotations, • browsers and overviews, • content-based information retrieval mechanisms, • structure-based information retrieval mechanisms, • backtracking and interaction history, and • landmarks and bookmarks. The perceived benefit of incorporating the hypermedia functionality into MetaEdit+ include the support for relationship representation and navigation, annotation capability, requirements tracing, and argumentation. Similar hypermedia features could and should be incorporated into other design systems as well, the approach being general enough to be utilized without taking
hypermedia as the main design paradigm for the whole system. Many knowledge-intensive software systems can benefit from hypermedia functionality, which makes ISlevel-HMF attractive both research-wise and commercially.
6. Conclusions This paper has addressed hypermedia functionality research. Hypermedia functionality was described as a twofold approach, comprising a method to investigate information systems and a technology to enhance information systems. Hypermedia functionality may be integrated into information systems using two different types of approaches, data and software retrofitting. Data retrofitting implies the re-structuring of data, while software retrofitting means a change of software components to provide the desired software system features. One of the key questions in the software retrofitting approach is the creation of links. Basically, links can be created by hand or generated automatically. Both handmade and computed links have their own advantages and disadvantages, and are dictated to by their own best practices. There is a social order for hypermedia functionality imposed by various information systems and at the operating systems level. Both information system level and operating system level functionality have their own advantages and disadvantages. In our opinion, however, information system level hypermedia functionality is of more immediate advantage at both research and commercial levels. In conclusion, some pilot systems of hypermedia functionality support for software systems have been developed. There is now a need to evaluate these pilots, and develop and introduce into use more applications, in addition to methods and descriptive models for the development of the desired functionality. Finally, we want to outline a research agenda for hypermedia functionality research. Key questions for further research include at least the following: 1. Which hypermedia features would best augment different kinds of systems? 2. What benefits can organizations, teams and individual users derive from the various hypermedia features? At what cost? 3. When to use data vs. software retrofitting approaches? 4. How can the hypermedia features in existing systems be analysed (e.g. methods, tools, and techniques for doing this)? 5. Should all existing relationships be represented as links? Constantly? Derived on what rules?
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
6. How can the usefulness or success/failure of hypermedia functionality implementations be evaluated? Our future research is aimed at evaluating the use of Linking Ability, and developing a framework of incorporating hypermedia functionality in design tools as well as other software systems. We also invite new researchers to tackle hypermedia functionality research questions.
7. Acknowledgements Thanks go to the participants of the Second International Workshop on Incorporating Hypertext Functionality into Software Systems (HTF2), held in conjunction with the Seventh ACM Conference on Hypertext, for providing valuable feedback regarding the research topography presented in this paper. My special thanks go to Janne Kaipala for his help in the programming of Linking Ability, and to the other MetaPHOR researchers.
8. References [1] M. Bieber, and H. Oinas-Kukkonen (editors), The First International Workshop on Incorporating Hypertext Functionality into Software Systems (HTF1), Edinburgh, Scotland, September 1994, New Jersey Institute of Technology, USA, Technical Report #95-10. [2] H. Ashman, V. Balasubramanian, M. Bieber, and H. Oinas-Kukkonen (editors), The Second International Workshop on Incorporating Hypertext Functionality into Software Systems (HTF2), Washington (D.C.), USA, March 1996, 104 pages. [3] M.P. Bieber, and S.O. Kimbrough, On Generalizing the Concept of Hypertext, MIS Quarterly, March 1992, pp. 7793. [4] M. Bieber, On Integrating Hypermedia into Decision Support and Other Information Systems. Decision Support Systems, Vol. 14, 1995, pp. 251-267. [5] H. Maurer, and I. Tomek, Broadening the Scope of Hypermedia Principles, Hypermedia, Vol. 2, No. 3, 1990, pp. 201-220. [6] M. Bieber, F. Vitali, H. Ashman, V. Balasubramanian, and H. Oinas-Kukkonen, Some Hypermedia Ideas for the WWW, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS ’97), January 1997. [7] Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Hypertext (Hypertext ’96), Washington (D.C.), USA, March 1996.
[8] C.J. Kacmar, Supporting Hypermedia Services in the User Interface, Hypermedia, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1993, pp. 85101. [9] M. Bieber, and C. Kacmar, Designing Hypertext Support for Computational Applications, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 38, No. 8, 1995, pp. 98-107. [10] D. Schwabe, A. Caloini, F. Garzotto, and P. Paolini, Hypertext Development Using a Model-Based Approach, Software — Practice and Experience, Vol. 22, No. 11, 1992, pp. 937-962. [11] T. Isakowitz, E.A. Stohr, and P. Balasubramanian, RMM: A Methodology for Structured Hypermedia Design, Communications of the ACM, Vol 38, No. 8, 1995, pp. 3444. [12] F. Halasz, and M. Schwartz, The Dexter Hypertext Reference Model, Communications of the ACM, Vol 37, No. 2, 1994, pp. 30-39. [13] L. Hardman, D.C.A. Bulterman, and G. van Rossum, The Amsterdam Hypermedia Model: Adding Time and Context to the Dexter Model, Communications of the ACM, Vol 37, No. 2, 1994, pp. 50-62. [14] S.R. Newcomb, N.A. Kipp, and V.T. Newcomb, The HyTime Hypermedia/Time-based Document Structuring Language, Communications of the ACM, Vol 34, No. 11, 1991, pp. 67-83. [15] H.C. Davis, S. Knight, and W. Hall, Light Hypermedia Link Services: A Study of Third-Party Application Integration, Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Conference on Hypertext (ECHT ’94), ACM Press, New York, 1994, pp. 41-50. [16] K.M. Anderson, R.N. Taylor, and E. J., Jr. Whitehead, Chimera: Hypertext for Heterogeneous Software Environments, Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Conference on Hypertext (ECHT ’94), ACM Press, New York, 1994, pp. 94-107. [17] H. Oinas-Kukkonen, Developing Hypermedia Systems — The Hypermedia Functionality Approach, In Proceedings of the Second Basque International Workshop on Information Technology (BIWIT ’95), keynote paper, July 1995, San Sebastian, Spain, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1995, pp. 2-8. [18] P.J. Nürnberg, J.J. Leggett, E.R. Schneider, and J.L. Schnase, Hypermedia Operating Systems: A New Paradigm for Computing, Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Hypertext (Hypertext ’96), Washington (D.C.), USA, March 1996, pp. 194-202.
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
[19] S. Kelly, K. Lyytinen, and M. Rossi, MetaEdit+: A Fully Configurable Multiuser and Multitool CASE Environment, Seventh International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE ’96), Crete, Greece, May 1996, Springer-Verlag, pp. 1-21. [20] G. Fischer, A.G. Lemke, R. McCall, and A.I. Morch, Making Argumentation Serve Design, Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 6, No. 3&4, 1991, pp. 393-419. [21] B. Ramesh, and V. Dhar, Supporting Systems Development by Capturing Deliberations During Requirements Engineering, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 6, June 1992, pp. 498-510.
[22] H. Oinas-Kukkonen, Debate Browser An Argumentation Tool for MetaEdit+ Environment. The Seventh European Workshop on Next Generation of CASE Tools (NGCT ’96), Crete, Greece, May 1996, pp. 77-86. [23] I. Tervonen, P. Kerola, and H. Oinas-Kukkonen, An Organizational Memory for Quality-based Software Design and Inspection: a collaborative multiview approach with hyperlinking capabilities, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS ’97), January 1997. [24] S. Brinkkemper, Integrating Diagrams in CASE Tools Through Modelling Transparency, Information and Software Technology, Vol. 35, No. 2, 1993, pp. 101-105.
Proceedings of The Thirtieth Annual Hawwaii International Conference on System Sciences ISBN 0-8186-7862-3/97 $17.00 © 1997 IEEE
1060-3425/97 $10.00 (c) 1997 IEEE
