ENSURING USEFUL CARTOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATIONS IN LOCATION-BASED SERVICES Urquhart, K.1, Cartwright, W.1, Miller, S.1, Mitchell, K.2, Quirion, C.2 and Benda, P.3 1
Department of Geospatial Science, RMIT University, Australia. 2 Webraska Mobile Technologies SA, Asia-Pacific. 3 Sensis Pty. Ltd., Australia. E-mail:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected] [email protected] ,
[email protected] and
[email protected] ABSTRACT Mobile Location-Based Services (LBS) are a current focus in wireless application development. Various services providing answers to queries such as ‘find my nearest…’ and ‘show me how to get to…’ are becoming increasingly available to the broader community. Recently, advances in technology have led to rapid deployment of LBS by wireless service providers. Whilst this has generated great excitement in the wireless industry, we argue that relatively little attention has been paid to the usefulness (i.e. usability and utility) of the geospatial aspects of these services, beyond a limited collection of academic studies. Of particular concern is the narrow range of cartographic representations used in LBS, comprising predominantly textual information and/or conventional maps, which may not be optimal for communicating the underlying data to users with limited spatial knowledge. A research program is in progress that intends to challenge current methods for the representation of geospatial information in LBS, by taking advantage of the novelty of the supporting technology to trial new representations and interaction techniques, which may be more appropriate and effective for use by everyday consumers. Moreover, the research will address cartographic challenges posed by the infrastructure and usage contexts associated with such services. To achieve its prescribed aims, this study is also amongst the earliest bodies of work to apply User-Centred Design techniques to LBS development, with active user involvement at all stages in order to ensure an optimal design. This paper details the rationale behind the current research program and existing research in the area, as well as the proposed research methodology, which incorporates the design of optimal models based on an extensive user needs analysis, the construction of a prototype service and an extensive evaluation of representations involving target users. Anticipated benefits for the LBS industry, the geospatial community and end users are also highlighted. 1.
INTRODUCTION
If you have ever been lost in an unfamiliar area without a map, or been in need of a phone book to find the nearest bank before closing time, it is likely that you have, however briefly, entertained the notion of a small, convenient device that could provide immediate location-related information to assist you in such situations. With the current state of technology, systems like these – once considered a thing of science fiction – are now a reality. Using portable, wireless devices such as mobile phones, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and SmartPhones (i.e. mobile phones with PDA capabilities) linked to the mobile Internet, everyday consumers can today access instant information about almost anything of relevance to them, at any time and in any place. Although this concept of ‘information at your fingertips’ is not entirely new (it in fact dates back to Vannevar Bush’s 1945 MEMEX vision: “a peripheral information machine that would store and retrieve information” [1, p.12]), it is the addition of contextual geospatial information – in particular location and time – that has the potential to revolutionise the way in which people conduct their everyday activities. Location and geospatial relationships are intrinsic qualities of everyday existence. They are the natural methods by which most people understand and relate to their environment. Niedzwiadek’s [2] description of location information as ‘pervasive’ is illustrated by examples from everyday life such as maps, images, addresses, post codes, phone numbers and events. Furthermore, common activities involve geospatial thinking, such as the comprehension of orientation and direction (eg. North), the realisation of distance properties (eg. proximity), the use of reference frames (eg. latitude and longitude), the effective use of road networks, and the recognition of landmark arrangements [3]. Equally as pervasive are mobile devices, with the number of worldwide mobile phone users having reportedly reached one billion in the last year [4]. Consequently, various sources point to a future ‘e-Society’ defined largely by the various wireless technologies and devices both existing and expected [5].
Proceedings of the 21st International Cartographic Conference (ICC) ‘Cartographic Renaissance’ ISBN: 0-958-46093-0
Durban, South Africa, 10 – 16 August 2003 Hosted by The International Cartographic Association (ICA) Produced by: Document Transformation Technologies
2591
It is no wonder then that consumers are eager to access data via mobile devices that is more than just simple voice calls – a fact anticipated early on, that is only now being realised by advances in wireless data transmission speeds, courtesy of new communication technologies [6]. Services that make use of location information have long been purported as ‘killer’ applications for the wireless industry [7], however in order for this vision to be realised, the services in question must add value so that users will be willing to pay to use them. As identified by Koeppel [8], the provision of location and proximity information on its own does not constitute a value-added service (particularly since such information can be readily obtained via numerous traditional means). This has been recognised by location-based service providers who aim to add value to a user’s quality of life by creating applications that provide convenience and/or save time and money – eg. instant access to upto-date routing information and/or data pertaining to specific locations, features, events, etc. [8]. Location can and has also been used to provide “more sophisticated services”, with the content tailored to specific contexts, thus limiting the amount of information that the user must interpret [9, p.17]. For these services to ultimately succeed, however, their usefulness must be ensured – not only in terms of the utility and usability of the services themselves, but more specifically of the cartographic representation, presentation and interaction techniques involved. Whilst the reasoning for this may not be obvious at first, it should be considered that users of traditional geospatial systems (eg. GIS) are generally trained in spatial thinking and reasoning [3]. Everyday consumers, on the other hand, are unlikely to be as adept at understanding traditional forms of cartographic representation (eg. “about 64% of the general population has difficulty in reading maps” [10, p.237]), and it is such users to whom the majority of these portable, non-expert, geospatial information systems are being marketed. The current research program is endeavouring to address the issue of useful cartographic representations in LBS. Following general recommendations made by experts in the field of usability [11-13], this will be accomplished through the application of a rigorous User-Centred Design methodology, incorporating specific Usability Engineering techniques. This paper begins with a general introduction to the technology involved in the research, along with the cartographic challenges it presents. Following this is a brief overview of the existing research related to the study area as well as the User-Centred Design methods to be employed. The benefits anticipated to result from the research are then highlighted, with the final section detailing the next steps in the research program. 2.
LOCATION-BASED SERVICES
For some time now, the concept of Location-Based Services has been present in society, differentiating information systems that specifically utilise location (and time) as filters in their data querying and presentation, in order to provide users with access to geographically related information, products and services. Appealing to a wide variety of users, Location-Based Services incorporate diverse sets of geospatial (and other) data and are today accessed via a number of different methods (wireless or wired networks, desktop, laptop or handheld computers, mobile phones, etc.). As a result, they can and have taken on a large variety of forms – some examples are provided in Table 1. Table 1. Examples of applications driven by Location-Based Services [adapted from 2]. Consumer
Business
Government
• • • • •
• • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • •
• • •
Where am I? (map, address, place) Where is …? (person, business, place) How do I get there? (address, place) Car broken down… need help. Nearest theatre playing the movie I want to see? Tell me when I’m near where I’m going. Show me the nearest … (business, place, etc.) Tourist attractions to visit?
Contact nearest field service personnel. Traffic alert! Where are my dispatched repair trucks? Taxi dispatch. What is near the hotel? Show me car rentals near the airport. Best supplier within the next two hours? Nearest repair services? Candidate store sites?
Local public announcements. Accident alert! Traffic re-routing for major events. Where are the street sweepers? Parking situation? New zoning. Emergency dispatch. Location-sensitive tolls. Environmental monitoring stations?
When the term Location-Based Services is used, most people inevitably think of what is really just one of its forms – ‘mobile’ Location-Based Services, also variably known as ‘mobile location services’, ‘wireless location services’ and ‘context-aware systems’ [8; 14]. These services, which are the focus of this paper, are typically accessed via highly mobile, Internet-enabled devices such as mobile phones, SmartPhones and/or PDAs, thus providing users with a greater degree of physical freedom over desktop- or laptop-based systems. Mobile Location-Based Services (herein referred to as LBS) evolved from more traditional systems as a result of advances in, and the convergence of, wireless telecommunications, Internet-enabled mobile devices, positioning technologies and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) [8]. In general, they exploit pertinent geospatial information about a user’s surrounding environment, their proximity to other objects in space (eg. people, places) and/or distant objects (eg. at future destinations) [15].
2592
As such, LBS rely on the accurate determination of the user’s location (generally using automatic positioning techniques such as GPS or mobile cell-based triangulation [16]), Internet connectivity via a wireless network for access to a geospatial search engine and finally, useful applications allowing the user to request/obtain the geographicallyrelated information they require. 2.1 Cartographic challenges of LBS “Cartographic representation is … the transformation that takes place when information is depicted in a way that can be perceived, encouraging the senses to exploit the geospatial structure of the portrayal as it is interpreted” [17, p.14]. The advantages of computer-based (multimedia) cartography over paper maps, in terms of geospatial data dissemination have been identified by Peterson [18] and include: the ability to better represent and communicate the spatial and dynamic world through interactivity; faster delivery and increased distribution via computer networks (eg. the Internet); the provision of information with greater currency and specificity to users, by offering more views/representations of the data; improved information and knowledge transfer through increased user-control of the information processing; and bringing maps to a larger audience of ‘non-expert’ map users. Access to digital geospatial information in a mobile computing environment, such as with LBS, enjoys many of these same advantages, however there are numerous distinctions from the stationary (eg. desktop) situation. Not only are there differences in the infrastructure (i.e. devices, display environment, networks) required for access to the data, there is also the impact that the dynamic context of use has on the requirements for data representation. This paper is primarily concerned with the unique challenges posed by the mobile LBS environment for cartographic representation, presentation and interaction techniques, and as such it is this theme that forms the focus for the following discussion of geospatial information delivery in a mobile environment, based on the two categories identified above. The next section will provide further detail concerning specific research undertaken in relation to these and associated issues. 2.1.1 Infrastructure Despite continuing improvements to the mobile devices and wireless networks used to deliver LBS, they will never truly compare to the capabilities offered by desktop computers and wired networks, in terms of display, interaction and performance [19]. Perhaps the most obvious limitation in this respect is the restricted screen size and resolution of most mobile devices. For example, the user interface of a typical handheld computer (eg. 3Com Palm: 6 x 6cm with 160 x 160 pixels) has a resolution between 1,200% and 400% lower than its desktop cousins (eg. 800 x 600 pixels or higher) [20; 21], with mobile phones generally faring worse. This necessarily limits the amount of information that can be represented and presented to the user at any one time, if the system is to be considered useful. Related to this are the wireless network issues of comparatively slower connections and higher latencies [22] which limit how much data can reasonably be delivered to a device. Further compounding the problem is the limited storage and processing power of many mobile devices [19], resulting in most systems’ underlying information and processing having to reside on the network/server rather than the device/client. In terms of user interaction with the geospatial information underlying LBS applications, a further issue involves the limited input capabilities inherent in most mobile devices. Keyboards are generally small or absent from mobile phones, SmartPhones and PDAs, often being replaced by touch screens, predictive text or handwriting recognition – all of which lack the speed and accuracy of a desktop computer’s input methods [23; 19]. Output capabilities are again restricted, as discussed above in relation to the display environment, however today’s devices are becoming more sophisticated in terms of providing true multimedia output; i.e. audio (voice, sound), visual (text, graphics) and/or haptic (vibration) techniques [23]. 2.1.2 Context Despite the limitations associated with the infrastructure of LBS, there are two major advantages they provide over services accessed via their stationary counterparts – immediate access to time-critical information and, more importantly, a mobility that rivals the paper map. This is not without its challenges however, with the potential context of use for LBS (“anywhere, anytime”) leading to issues surrounding the content presented to the user at any given time. The idea of context is discussed by Schmidt [23, p.193], who contends that “… context is more than location…[the term can also] describe the environment, situation, state, surroundings, task, and so on”. For the purposes of this research, however, a simplified definition of context has been adopted, focussing on the user (cf. technological) aspects of location, time, goals and tasks. With this in mind, it is generally assumed that different users in different contexts have differing goals, thus they require different sets of geospatial (and other) information, and different representations, presentations and interactions. This makes it both important and difficult in LBS to present the user with only the information which is genuinely of interest to them in their current situation [24]. Moreover, the dynamic nature of the user’s location is integral to this, requiring the underlying content to be both up-to-date and accurate.
2593
Environment is also an important factor in the discussion of context. In this respect it is significant for cartographic representation, presentation and interaction techniques to be sensitive to the dynamic settings within which LBS are accessed. Brewster and Murray [21] argue that when a mobile device is used in the real world, the user’s visual attention is inevitably directed toward the environment rather than the device. Kjeldskov [25] sees this as a particularly important consideration affecting the amount of information that should be presented to the user, since small and cluttered displays place high demands on a user’s attention. Furthermore, he argues that in order for mobile devices to be highly usable in a real world setting, the representations involved must be simple and require little interaction. The issues discussed above indicate that in order to ensure useful applications and cartographic representations for LBS, the underlying information must be carefully tailored to the existing constraints of both the infrastructure supporting the services as well as the context of use. A warning, however, comes from Cheverst et al. [14] who advise caution in constraining the information presented by pre-empting user goals for particular contexts, particularly when incorrect determinations of context (based on poor accuracy of data) are a danger. 3.
REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH: RATIONALE
Whilst the previous section has provided background on the topics involved in the research, the following discussion delves further into research activities, both past and current, occurring in the related fields. Specifically, usability research can be grouped into three categories: usability of geospatial information for everyday users, usability of cartographic representations in general and usability of services on mobile devices. Similarly, case studies of research into LBS can be separated into those dealing with (generic) representation techniques and those concerning issues of usability. 3.1 General usability research 3.1.1 Geospatial information for everyday users In 2002, an AGILE-affiliated workshop was held to develop a research agenda regarding geospatial data usability, and in doing so it addressed five key questions: 1) What do we mean by usability?; 2) Why is usability important?; 3) What are the characteristics of geospatial data usability?; 4) What are the research problems to be solved in geospatial data usability?; and 5) What should the research priorities be? [26]. A large number of concepts and issues arose from the discussions, with those most relevant to the current research listed below: ! Aspects of learnability, effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction, in the context of specific user goals in certain environments, can together be used to describe the idea of usability (note, this definition has been adapted from those developed within the usability research/standards community [27; 28]); ! Geospatial data has the potential to support decision-making that is faster and more informed, however poor usability of the data can counteract this and ultimately inhibit geospatial data usage; ! The effects of geospatial data use can help to characterise its usability (eg. information acquisition, time saving and satisfaction measures); ! Geospatial data usage (and GIS in particular) is no longer confined to the realm of expert users, with benefits to be gained from instead targeting non-expert users with respect to improving usability; ! Presentation of existing geospatial data sets (i.e. the ‘human interface’) is an area for constant improvement; and ! Important research priorities include the development of formal rules for ensuring geospatial data usability, linking usability to user tasks and the differences between geospatial and non-geospatial data usability [26]. An important theme identified above, and elsewhere in the literature [29; 30], is that digital geospatial data sets are becoming increasingly available to users with little or no formal training in the interpretation and analysis of geospatial information [31]. In a general consumer sense, LBS are but one example of such data access, used to aid the spatial thinking and decision-making that is essential to everyday life, but does not always come naturally [3]. The implications of this are clarified by McKee [32] who (on behalf of the Open GIS Consortium) recognises a general need for determining how digital geospatial data can be used most effectively by everyday citizens and Cartwright et al. [29, p.48] who refer more specifically to data representations in stating that “access to geospatial information and the interfaces that provide the ‘gateways’ to this information, need to be designed in sympathy to all users, so as to ensure equity of access and use”. 3.1.2 Cartographic representations According to Fairbairn [17], cartographic representation encompasses both cartographic communication and cartographic visualization (based on MacEachren’s [Cartography]3 characterisation [33]), with the potential to invoke not only the user’s visual sense, but also their audio and/or haptic senses in the presentation of, and interaction with, geospatial data.
2594
Like cartographic visualization, then, the usability of cartographic representations can be generally guided by the proposition “How do I say what to whom [about the geospatial data and its characteristics]… and is it effective” [34, p.12]. This idea is central to this paper, identifying the need to properly specify the end users of the cartographic representation process, including their goals and tasks, in the analysis stages, and to follow up with a comparative evaluation by actual end users in order to test the effectiveness (and indeed the usability) of the resulting representation(s) [35]. A general observation that can be made from a review of the recent literature is that much of the research involving the usability of cartographic representations has, understandably, revolved around the use of maps – still arguably the most dominant means of representing geospatial information. Peterson [18], for example, suggests that interactive multimedia (or more specifically, Multimedia Cartography techniques) may enable users to form better mental representations of their environment and help to improve their general map use skills. Similarly, Brunner-Friedrich and Nothegger [36] refer to research indicating that presentation of a route map including landmark information more adequately supports the formation of mental maps developed by users during the navigation task, as opposed to purely text-based representations. Despite these observations, and McKee’s [32] conclusion that most geospatial resources in the future “will involve simple, specialized, stylized, interactive map displays”, it is important to remember that maps are not the sole form of cartographic representation that must be considered when improving the usability of geospatial information – particularly in the context of LBS with its inherently limited visual display qualities. Reichenbacher [37] acknowledges this in his discussion of ‘Mobile Cartography’ citing the need for research into matching appropriate representation techniques (both visual and non-visual) with user tasks and contexts in a mobile environment. 3.1.3 Mobile services As a precursor for LBS, mobile devices and related services (in a more general sense) have been around for some time, and as such their usability has been discussed, tested and improved many times over, in many ways. From laptop to handheld computers and mobile phones, concerns over the usefulness of presentation and interaction methods and techniques to overcome the observed limitations have evolved in-line with advances in the technology leading to increasingly smaller devices with widely varying capabilities. Some of the more specific and recent research in this area has focussed on the presentation of text on mobile devices, in order to improve the quality of the user’s reading experience [38], the use of voice as input when accessing the mobile Internet [39], improving the aesthetics of services on small screen devices [40], the usability and design of Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) services [41; 42] and information retrieval/interaction (eg. via scrolling) using small screens for web browsing [43]. In terms of more generic usability research findings, a number of important concepts for the design of largely Webbased mobile services have been individually identified and include: the support of user behaviours (eg. ‘strategic information seeking’ vs. Web browsing) and expectations of the system (accounting for task-specific mental models) [20; 28]; adaptive personalisation of content, including adaptive hypermedia, based on user needs ascertained from explicit and/or implicit models of user interests [22; 44]; the need for a “minimal attention user interface” (a simple user interface with minimal requirements for interaction) to ensure high usability in a mobile setting [25, p.271]; and, linked to adaptive personalisation, ‘indexicality’ or the use of context-aware computing (eg. based on filters such as location, time, user profile and display medium) to “[simplify] the user’s understanding of, and interaction with” a mobile service [14, p.8; 9; 5]. Weiss [19] identifies, however, that despite the numerous examples of desktop Web and software design guidelines currently available, few comprehensive publications exist that provide solid usability guidelines for the design of mobile services (and in particular user interfaces for the medium), an issue that he endeavours to address with his book entitled Handheld Usability. 3.2 LBS case studies Representations in LBS have advanced since their technology-driven beginnings. Advances in mobile communications technology (devices and networks) have seen movement away from the early LBS manifestations, which were largely WAP-based and characterised by poor positioning accuracy, simplistic representations, consisting mainly of text and only low-level graphics (where present), restricted interface design possibilities and low levels of interactivity [6] – see Figure 1a). Today, service providers are producing LBS applications with more sophisticated design principles in mind: intuitiveness, responsiveness, customised to device/network capabilities, exploiting local processing/storage, utilising context and providing deep relevant content [45] – see Figure 1b). A number of recent research projects have also begun to actively explore the potential of LBS for the support of everyday consumer decision-making. The discussion below highlights the cartographic representation techniques utilised by some of the more important studies as well as those LBS research projects focussed on issues of usability.
2595
a)
b)
Figure 1. Examples of cartographic representations in a) early WAP-based LBS (www.geo-strategies.com ) and b) more recent LBS offerings (www.vindigo.com ). 3.2.1 Representations in LBS The mobile Internet is accessed using mobile radio networks that have evolved over time from the first generation (1G) analogue networks (eg. AMPS – Advanced Mobile Phone Standard) to today’s second (2G) and third (3G) generation digital systems. GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) is an example of a 2G network, characterised by circuit-switched data connections and transmission rates of 9.6Kbps. GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) is an extension of GSM, offering packet-switching and data rates up to 57.6Kbps. 3G technologies such as UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System) are also packet-switched and can provide a single user with 64-144Kbps in data transmission rates, enabling high-quality multimedia applications [46; 39; 6]. The capabilities of mobile devices have progressed in line with these network developments, with multimedia-capable mobile phones, SmartPhones and PDAs now widely available. Capitalising on this state of affairs, researchers have been exploring the use of (adaptive) multimedia in LBS, with the vast majority implementing services for tourists – a particularly representative user base for LBS, considering the obvious geospatial information needs of the people involved. 3.3 Cyberguide The Cyberguide project comprises a location-aware handheld tour guide for directing visitors around a laboratory at Georgia University [47]. Originally intended to address the development of context-aware mobile applications from a Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) perspective, the research focused on two user-context aspects: location and orientation. The resulting prototype was based around a central map with which the user interacted both to find their way around the laboratory, and to access underlying content (eg. to find information about demonstrations situated throughout the laboratory). Proximity to particular locations within the laboratory, determined via infrared positioning, also activated a type of “push” service, whereby information pertinent to a nearby demonstration was automatically ‘pushed’ to the user [47]. 3.4 DeepMap Deep Map was based on the development of a mobile tourist information system incorporating location-awareness, which was accessed via a wearable computer including a microphone and headphones for audio input/output, and a touch screen for visual output [48]. Whilst the main aims of the project were centred on providing users with large domain knowledge, enabling user interaction via natural language, the use of computer vision to localise the user, and multi-lingual user support, a number of cartographic representations were employed to portray the underlying geospatial information. These included: 3D visualisations enabling users to go on virtual tours, aid in real world user-orientation and provide historical information; multimedia databases providing access to tourism-related information, sights and services; and a “talking map” enabling spatial querying via natural spoken language and provision of oral route instructions [48]. 3.5 Lol@ Cartographic researchers involved with the Telecommunications Research Centre, Vienna (FTW – Forschungszentrum Telekommunikation Wien) recently developed a prototype LBS application named Lol@ (Local Location Assistant), a PDA-based service that guides foreign tourists along a pre-defined tour of Vienna’s first district. A major aim for this project was to demonstrate that the application of multimedia techniques would increase the acceptance of LBS and thus the efficiency of cartographic communication processes through the development of “TeleCartography” – the use of mobile devices and wireless networks as tools for the distribution of digital cartographic presentation forms [6, p.143]. Different cartographic issues were considered by the research, including support of the user’s spatial orientation, visualisation of the user’s position in space (and the associated accuracy), methods for interaction with the underlying data, update frequencies for the display/content, and dynamic mapping techniques [49]. The end result centred on a set of pre-prepared, interactive, raster and vector maps (using two different scales) featuring symbolisation of major landmarks, points of interest and other topographical objects (to aid in user orientation), as well as “tooltips” and
2596
“hotspots” enabling access to additional textual information and multimedia content (i.e. audio and visual information about specific tourist attractions), respectively [50]. 3.6 LBS usability An important factor that was acknowledged by the researchers involved with Lol@, is the idea of LBS acceptance. As is the case with most products and services, unless LBS are considered useful to, and therefore accepted by, their target markets, they will not be successful. A number of research projects that have been undertaken with a focus on LBS usability (and hence usefulness) are described below. 3.7 HIPS Some of the earliest research into location-aware services, which closely followed the advent of the earliest PDAs (eg. Apple’s Newton), was related to interactive museum tours [51]. Funded by the European Commission, HIPS (HyperInteraction within Physical Space) was one such pioneering project, aimed at allowing city or museum tourists to “navigate both the physical space and a related information space at the same time” [52]. A major innovation of HIPS was the application of a User-Centred Design methodology to the development of a tourism-based multimedia application, incorporating four major activities: 1) understanding and specifying the context of use (users and environment); 2) specifying user and organisational needs in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction; 3) producing designs and prototypes/solutions; and 4) evaluating solutions against user criteria (using representative users) [52]. The presentation of information involved dynamic generation of adaptive content, which varied based on the user’s location (derived via infrared, radio and/or GPS) and direction, a defined user model (incorporating interests and knowledge) and data previously supplied. Non-spatial information access was multimodal (audio and visual) and integrated with maps and spatial directions [53; 52]. 3.8 GUIDE GUIDE is an adaptive hypermedia-based “prototype context-aware tourist guide” for the City of Lancaster (U.K.), focussed on exploring the use of contextual parameters for simplifying user interaction with mobile services [9, p.17]. Based on an ethnographic study (involving interviews and observations of target users), a number of initial usability requirements were identified and incorporated into the system including: sufficient flexibility to cater for different users; user-controlled interaction; content and information presentation tailored to personal (eg. current location, user interests) and environmental (eg. attraction opening times, time of day) context; support for dynamic information; and interactive services [9; 54]. It is interesting to note that, despite the non-cartographic focus of the study, evaluation of the system (incorporating both expert walkthroughs and field trials with target users) yielded evidence that users generally wanted access to maps during their interaction, particularly when undertaking navigation tasks. 3.9 PNT Researchers at Ericsson’s Usability and Interaction Lab in Sweden built and tested a Personal Navigation Tool (PNT) service in order to determine the potential utility and usability of LBS [55]. The PNT is WAP-based and accessed using a SmartPhone. Although no information on the specific procedures employed to gather data were supplied, the researchers identified from the outset that in order to ensure high usability of the service, the end users must be clearly defined and understood in terms of their needs, wants and how they would interact with the service. To this end, several characteristics of typical end users were identified including: impatience when learning new applications; a different focus for mobile devices as opposed to desktop computers; easily distracted by the surrounding environment (mobile device interaction often becomes a secondary task); and require fast access to content with few interactions [55]. Whilst the testing, involving SmartPhone-familiar users in a laboratory setting, was mainly focussed on the usability of the PNT service itself, some findings relating specifically to the component cartographic representations were uncovered. In general, the users fared better with the retrieval of route directions than with the retrieval of specific location information. In particular, text-based route directions were seen as essential for navigation tasks, with maps rated as less useful, however they were seen as being important for providing an initial overview and spatial understanding (eg. for use in orientation and creation of a mental model for the route). One final finding involved the use of intermediate zoom levels on the maps, which were considered unnecessary with users preferring to have faster transition between overview and street-level maps, with the possibility for ‘distorted maps’ showing only essential information [55]. The case studies presented above illustrate the currently high level of interest in the design of LBS in both the geospatial and HCI communities. They demonstrate a variety of representation, presentation and interaction techniques available for access to geospatial and other information within LBS (enhanced by the use of multimedia), and the varying opinions regarding the appropriateness of specific representations. Further emphasis is placed on the need for design of the services from a user-centred perspective in order to ensure useful and successful products. The current research will add to this knowledge by going one step further and applying User-Centred Design techniques not only to the services themselves, but in particular to the comparison of different cartographic representations in order to determine appropriate and optimal methods. In doing so, it will visit the target users first, incorporating their tasks and goals into the selection of appropriate representations for a demonstrative prototype.
2597
Furthermore, it will continue to revisit the users throughout the design and development phases to evaluate the usability and utility of the various cartographic and ancillary representations employed and thus develop, through refinement, an optimal model to satisfy the research aims. 4.
METHODOLOGY
In their presentation of an agenda for research addressing the “current role and potential of map displays”, Fairbairn et al. [17, p.13] proposed that when determining appropriate cartographic representations, it will be helpful to study the impact of new media displays, the interaction of users with them and users’ reactions to them. From an industry perspective, ensuring high usability in services such as LBS is believed to be important for the commercial success of a product [56]. Either way, it is important to undertake any design activity with the end user clearly in mind and preferably involved in the process, so that the final product ultimately meets their needs [52]. This theme is particularly relevant and important to the current study, as discussed at the end of the previous section, with a methodology incorporating User-Centred Design techniques having been selected to accomplish the research aims. 4.1 Underlying concept: User-Centred Design As the name suggests, User-Centred Design (UCD) is a process of (product) design whereby users are actively involved at all stages. To clarify, it is essentially design for users, as opposed to design by users or in the absence of users altogether. In their review of current UCD practices within the HCI industry, Vredenburg et al. [57, p.472] developed a useful working definition for UCD, incorporating “the active involvement of users for a clear understanding of user and task requirements, iterative design and evaluation, and a multidisciplinary approach”. UCD is often referred to by alternative names such as human factors engineering, ergonomics, and usability engineering [27]. However, as Ehrlich and Rohn [58] distinguish, UCD is more an umbrella term for designing and ensuring useful products, with the other labels, and in particular Usability Engineering (UE), referring to the particular methods and activities employed by practitioners (and researchers) to satisfy the general aims of UCD. The principles of UE and UCD have (logically) developed in parallel, with their beginnings traced to the influential works of researchers Gould and Lewis [59] and Norman and Draper [60], respectively [11; 57]. Since that time, each has become the subject of numerous publications and have come to be viewed by many as integral factors for the development of successful commercial software products [56; 11; 61; 27]. Since Gould and Lewis [59] first put forward their three general principles of UCD – (1) early focus on users and tasks, (2) empirical measurement and (3) iterative design – a multitude of techniques for ensuring useful and easy to use products have been developed and adopted as common practice. A more detailed, and widely accepted, UE model was defined by Nielsen in 1992 [12], incorporating 10 techniques generally deemed necessary for successful UCD. Experts in the field acknowledge, however, that it is not always feasible to employ every UE method (due to time and budget constraints, amongst other things), with a smaller subset of the techniques often being sufficient to achieve the aims of UCD, provided that early user consultation, iterative and participatory design, and prototyping and empirical testing with real users are involved [11; 12]. Based on the budget and time constraints associated with the current study, this factor was considered during the initial research planning stages. Further considerations involved the nature of UE, being a process originally developed for improving commercial software products rather than as a basis for academic research methods, which meant that many of the techniques were not relevant to the current research. 4.2 Users Selection of a user group for this study has been made based on a number of factors, with the main consideration being the market direction of the Industry Partner for the research, Webraska Mobile Technologies, Asia-Pacific. Webraska’s current movement towards travel-based LBS in Australia has been the major defining factor for the end user characteristics identified below. Moreover, the domestic tourism-travel focus is supported by figures published by the Bureau of Tourism Research Australia [62], with holiday/leisure (i.e. tourism, for the purposes of this study) having been the main purpose of travel for domestic visitors within Australia in recent years – remaining around 50% of total travel (based on visitor nights). Furthermore, it may be argued that travel (particularly for tourism purposes) is the activity of everyday users that lends itself most to obtaining benefits from LBS, and for which consumers have a particular interest [7]. This is evident not least from the propensity of researchers in this area to develop and test tourism-based LBS applications (see Section 0). Therefore, at the current time the ideal end user characteristics for the research are as follows (note that initial research outcomes may lead to minor changes made to this list): ! ! ! ! !
Australians; 30-40 years of age; Typically ‘early adopters’ of technology; Disposable income (able to afford ancillary devices, such as a mobile phone, PDA); and Generally time poor.
2598
!
Travel habits: travel to distant (inter- or intra-state), generally unfamiliar, locations; travel on a regular basis (eg. annually); travel overland – by car, bicycle and/or foot; and travel as a tourism-based activity.
Users will be sourced from the general public – most likely an existing user group affiliated with Webraska – with the ultimate selection of participants based on the application of the criteria listed above. 4.3 Proposed method Below is a discussion of the major UE tasks incorporated into the research plan for this study. It is worth highlighting at this time that there are a number of dependencies between the various tasks. This means that the development of the research plan for this study will be a necessarily dynamic process and will thus evolve from its current form throughout the life of the project. 4.3.1 Phase I – Pre-design / Requirements Analysis The first step in the research plan, User Profiling, is important for determining a general description of the characteristics of the end user population, prior to undertaking any design activities. To this end, a questionnaire will be administered to members of the user group, with the responses used to identify major user characteristics and tasks for input into the next and later stages of the process. Following on from this, a Contextual Task Analysis will be performed, involving an ethnographic field study of the users’ current tasks and activity flow within a specified travel context. This will comprise observations of a subset of users undertaking a set of representative tasks, whilst thinking aloud regarding their geospatial information needs and related decisions (thus enabling understanding and specification of underlying user goals). At this point, qualitative and quantitative goals can be ascertained via Usability Goal Setting, in terms of specifying usability requirements for use in the upcoming evaluation stages. Finally, and independent of the other activities, two sets of design-related information will be compiled: a) the capabilities and constraints of the user interface inherent in the selected technology platform and b) the general user interface design principles and guidelines affecting the research (i.e. related to UE and Cartographic Design). 4.3.2 Phase II – Model / Prototype Design and Development Using the output from Phase I, a number of coherent and rule-based, high-level user interface design Models will be established, incorporating alternative cartographic representations that map to the user activity models defined previously. From these, a series of Mock-ups will be created to support the evaluation and refinement of the models. Semi-formal Usability Testing under laboratory conditions will then be used to gather qualitative data relating to the (comparative) usability of the mocked-up representations. The outputs will enable refinement of the models, based on suggestions for improvement gathered from the data analysis. In order to support more rigorous evaluation, refinement, and validation of the updated models, a working Prototype will be developed on the selected technology platform, incorporating alternative representations and the design rules defining them. Formal (comparative) Usability Testing of the prototype under realistic usage conditions will be used to gather both quantitative and qualitative data relating to the usability of the service and its cartographic representations (based on the requirements determined during the Usability Goal Setting). A questionnaire administered to users afterwards will supplement the results by gathering subjective feedback data relating to their personal opinions of the service / representations. Finally, evaluation of the prototype will enable iterative update of the models, based on suggestions for improvement gathered from the data analysis. Ideally an optimised set of cartographic representations will define a more refined model, whilst the related design guidelines will be documented. Time permitting, the prototype will be updated and re-evaluated, to further satisfy the iterative requirements of UE and thus guarantee high usability of the cartographic representations comprising the model. 5.
ANTICIPATED BENEFITS
A number of positive outcomes are anticipated to come out of the research program that is the focus of this paper. Firstly, the research has the potential to bring benefits to the LBS industry through the provision of guidelines for optimal cartographic representation, presentation and interaction techniques relating to small screen devices (albeit for a specific user group). Secondly, a design methodology will be developed, based on traditional UCD, which will be tailored to LBS and may therefore be employed to ensure usefulness in new and existing LBS products across the industry. Thirdly, it is anticipated that the cartographic representation model(s) produced will contribute to further research, development and standards activities in the industry, such as those being undertaken as part of the Open GIS Consortium’s Open Location Services Initiative [63] and the Location Interoperability Forum [64]. Fourthly, the research has been structured to provide real-world understanding of the issues associated with representation, presentation and interaction for geospatial data delivered via LBS. As such, the outcomes will contribute valuable knowledge and techniques to the geospatial research community both in Australia and internationally, expanding the current understanding of cartographic representations on mobile devices and providing a basis for further research in this area.
2599
Finally, it is envisaged that the study will provide significant benefits to the end users themselves, with immediate access to relevant and usable geospatial data having the potential to improve the efficiency, safety and enjoyment of their tourism pursuits. 6.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
The research proposed in this paper aims to satisfy recent research initiatives calling for more applied research into the usefulness of alternative cartographic representation techniques based upon new technologies [29; 17; 35]. With a focus on representations within LBS and the application of User-Centred Design techniques, it is envisaged that new and different methods for geospatial information representation, presentation and interaction may be found that will be more appropriate and useful to everyday users. The data collection for the first stage, User Profiling, is scheduled to begin shortly and will commence the practical component of the study. Ongoing research will continue throughout the data collection and analysis stages with the formal research design currently being finalised. 7. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24]
REFERENCES Cartwright, W. 1999, 'Chapter 2 - Development of Multimedia', in Multimedia Cartography, eds. Cartwright, W., Peterson, M.P. and Gartner, G., Springer, Berlin, pp.11-30. Niedzwiadek, H. 2002, Where's the Value in Location Services?, http://jlocationservices.com/EducationalResources/WhatareLocationServices.htm# [10 Dec, 2002]. Golledge, R. 2003, Thinking Spatially, http://www.directionsmag.com/article.php?article_id=277 [12 Jan, 2003]. EMC 2002, EMC announces 1 billion cellular phone users in the world!, http://www.emcdatabase.com/website.nsf/index/pr020319#this-page [18 Mar, 2003]. Graham, C. and Kjeldskov, J. 2003, 'Indexical representations for context-aware mobile devices', In IADIS International Conference on e-Society, 3-6 June, Lisbon. Gartner, G. and Uhlirz, S. 2002, 'Maps, Multimedia and the Mobile Internet', In ICA Commission on Maps and the Internet Annual Meeting, ed. Gartner, G., Institute of Cartography and Geomedia Technique, 24-25 Sept, Karlsruhe, pp.143-150. Hamai, K. 2001, 'Location Information is Critical to Wireless', Wireless Design and Development, 9(11), pp.3435. Koeppel, I. 2000, What are Location Services? - From a GIS Perspective, http://jlocationservices.com/EducationalResources/WhatareLocationServices.htm# [10 Dec, 2002]. Cheverst, K., Davies, N., Mitchell, K., Friday, A. and Efstratiou, C. 2000, 'Developing a Context-aware Electronic Tourist Guide: Some Issues and Experiences', In CHI2000 conference on human factors in computing systems, 1-6 Apr, The Hague, pp.17-24. Streeter, L. and Vitello, D. 1986, 'A Profile of Drivers' Map-Reading Abilities', Human Factors, 28(2), pp.223239. Mayhew, D.J. 1999, The Usability Engineering Lifecycle: A Practitioner's Handbook for User Interface Design, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco. Nielsen, J. 1992, 'The Usability Engineering Life Cycle', IEEE Computer, 25(3), pp.12-22. Norman, D.A. 1990, The Design of Everyday Things, MIT Press, London. Cheverst, K., Davies, N., Mitchell, K. and Efstratiou, C. 2001, 'Using Context as a Crystal Ball: Rewards and Pitfalls', Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(1), pp.8-11. Golledge, R.G. 2001, 'Location-Based Services and Human Navigation - Position Paper', In CSSIS Specialist Meeting on Location-based Services, 14-15 Dec, Santa Barbara. Mountain, D. and Raper, J. 2000, 'Designing geolocation services for next generation mobile phone systems', In Association for Geographic Information Conference, 27 Sept, London. Fairbairn, D., Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., Buziek, G. and Dykes, J. 2001, 'Representation and its relationship with cartographic visualization', Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 28(1), pp.13-28. Peterson, M.P. 1999, 'Chapter 3 - Elements of Multimedia Cartography', in Multimedia Cartography, eds. Cartwright, W., Peterson, M.P. and Gartner, G., Springer, Berlin, pp.31-40. Weiss, S. 2002, Handheld Usability, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., West Sussex. Albers, M. and Kim, L. 2002, 'Information design for the small-screen interface: An overview of Web design issues for personal digital assistants', Technical Communication, 49(1), pp.45-60. Brewster, S. and Murray, R. 2000, 'Presenting Dynamic Information on Mobile Computers', Personal Technologies, 4(2), pp.209-212. Billsus, D., Brunk, C.A., Evans, C., Gladish, B. and Pazzani, M. 2002, 'Adaptive interfaces for ubiquitous web access', Communications of the ACM, 45(5), pp.34-38. Schmidt, A. 2000, 'Implicit Human Computer Interaction Through Context', Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 4(2 and 3), pp.191-199. Coschurba, P., Baumann, J., Kubach, U. and Leonhardi, A. 2001, 'Metaphors and Context-Aware Information Access', Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(1), pp.16-19.
2600
[25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36]
[37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51]
Kjeldskov, J. 2002, '"Just-in-Place" Information for Mobile Device Interfaces', In Mobile HCI 2002, ed. Paterno, F., Springer, Sept, Pisa, pp.271-275. Wachowicz, M., Riedemann, C., Vullings, W., Suarez, J. and Cromvoets, J. 2002, 'Workshop Report on Spatial Data Usability', In 5th AGILE Conference on Geographic Information Science, 25-27 Apr, Palma (Mallorca). Rubin, J. 1994, 'Chapter 1 - The Problem of Unusable Products and Systems', in Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, USA, pp.3-23. Helyar, V. 2002, 'Assessing user requirements for the mobile Internet', Appliance Design(3). Cartwright, W., Crampton, J., Gartner, G., Miller, S., Mitchell, K., Siekierska, E. and Wood, J. 2001, 'Geospatial information visualization user interface issues', Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 28(1), pp.4560. Stojanovic, D.H. and Djordjevic-Kajan, S.J. 2001, 'Developing location-based services from a GIS perspective', In 5th International Conference on Telecommunications in Modern Satellite, Cable and Broadcasting Service, 19-21 Sept, Nis, pp.459-462. Smith, J., Mackaness, W., Kealy, A. and Williamson, I. forthcoming, 'Spatial Data Infrastructure Requirements for Mobile Location Based Journey Planning', Transactions in GIS. McKee, L. 2002, Digital Maps: An Essential Part of Every Citizen's interface to the NII, http://www.opengis.org/papers/citizen.html [Aug 14, 2002]. MacEachren, A.M. 1994, 'Chapter 1 - Visualization in Modern Cartography: Setting the Agenda', in Visualization in Modern Cartography, eds. MacEachren, A.M. and Taylor, D.R.F., Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, pp.1-12. Kraak, M.-J. 1998, 'The cartographic visualization process: from presentation to exploration', Cartographic Journal, 35(1), pp.11-15. Slocum, T.A., Blok, C., Jiang, B., Koussoulakou, A., Montello, D.R., Fuhrmann, S. and Hedley, N.R. 2001, 'Cognitive and usability issues in geovisualization', Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 28(1), pp.61-75. Brunner-Friedrich, B. and Nothegger, C. 2002, 'Concepts for User-Oriented Cartographic Presentation on Mobile Devices - a Pedestrian Guidance Service for the TU Vienna', In ICA Commission on Maps and the Internet Annual Meeting, ed. Gartner, G., Institute of Cartography and Geomedia Technique, 24-25 Sept, Karlsruhe, pp.189-196. Reichenbacher, T. 2001, 'The World in Your Pocket - Towards a Mobile Cartography', In 20th International Cartographic Conference, 6-10 Aug, Beijing, pp.2514-2521. Russell, M., Hull, J. and Wesley, R. 2001, 'Reading with RSVP on a Small Screen: Does Font Size Matter?' Usability News (Software Usability Research Laboratory), 3(1). Mohan, A. and Mohan, A. 2000, 'Voice Enabled Request and Response For Mobile Devices Supporting WAP Protocol: The Constraints', In IEEE European Conference on Universal Multi-service Networks, 2-4 Oct, Colmar. Karlsson, P. and Djabri, F. 2001, 'Analogue styled user interfaces: An exemplified set of principles intended to improve aesthetic qualities in use', In 3rd International Workshop on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices, 10 Sept, Lille. Ramsay, M. and Nielsen, J. 2000, WAP Usability, Deja Vu: 1994 All Over Again, Report from a Field Study, Neilsen Norman Group, Fremont, CA, USA. Serco Usability Services 2000, Designing WAP Services: Usability Guidelines, http://www.usability.serco.com/research/suswapguide.pdf [30 May, 2002]. Jones, M., Marsden, G., Mohd-Nasir, N., Boone, K. and Buchanan, G. 1999, 'Improving Web interaction on small displays', Computer Networks, 31(11-16), pp.1129-1137. Herder, E. and van Dijk, B. 2002, 'Personalized adaptation to device characteristics', In 2nd International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, 29-31 May, Malaga, pp.598-602. Caceres, R., Donham, J., Fitterman, B., Joerg, D., Smith, M. and Vetter, T. 2002, 'Mobile Computing Technology at Vindigo', IEEE Wireless Communications, 9(1), pp.50-53. Pospischil, G., Umlauft, M. and Michlmayr, E. 2002, 'Designing LoL@, a Mobile Tourist Guide for UMTS', In Mobile HCI 2002, ed. Paterno, F., Springer, Sept, Pisa, pp.140-154. Long, S., Aust, D., Abowd, G. and Atkeson, C. 1996, 'Cyberguide: Prototyping Context-Aware Mobile Applications', In CHI '96 conference companion on human factors in computing systems, 13-18 Apr, Vancouver, pp.293-294. Malaka, R. 1999, 'Deep Map: The Multilingual Tourist Guide', In FuSeNed Workshop, November 8-9, Heidelberg, Germany. Uhlirz, S. 2001, 'Cartographic Concepts for UMTS-Location Based Services', In 3rd International Symposium on Mobile Mapping Technology, 3-5 Jan, Cairo. Gartner, G. and Uhlirz, S. 2001, 'Cartographic Concepts for Realizing a Location Based UMTS Service: Vienna City Guide "Lol@"', In 20th International Cartographic Conference, 6-10 Aug, Beijing, pp.3229-3238. Amirian, S. 2001, Hand-held Mobile Computing in Museums, www.cimi.org/whitesite/AmirianBJM.htm [13 Mar, 2003].
2601
[52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64]
Broadbent, J. and Marti, P. 1997, 'Location aware mobile interactive guides: usability issues', In 4th International Conference on Hypermedia and Interactivity in Museums, Sept, Paris. Oppermann, R., Specht, M. and Jaceniak, I. 1999, 'Hippie: A Nomadic Information System', In 1st International Symposium on Handheld and Ubiquitous Computing, 27-29 Sept, Karlsruhe, pp.330-333. Cheverst, K., Mitchell, K. and Davies, N. 2002, 'The role of adaptive hypermedia in a context-aware tourist GUIDE', Communications of the ACM, 45(5), pp.47-51. Chincholle, D., Goldstein, M., Nyberg, M. and Eriksson, M. 2002, 'Lost or Found? A usability Evaluation of a Mobile Navigation and Location-Based Service', In Mobile HCI 2002, ed. Paterno, F., Springer, Sept, Pisa, pp.211-224. Butler, K.A. 1996, 'Usability Engineering Turns 10', Interactions, 3(1), pp.58-75. Vredenburg, K., Mao, J., Smith, P.W. and Carey, T. 2002, 'A Survey of User-Centred Design Practice', In Conference on human factors and computing systems, 20-25 Apr, Minneapolis, pp.471-478. Ehrlich, K. and Rohn, J.A. 1994, 'Chapter 4 - Cost Justification of Usability Engineering: A Vendor's Perspective', in Cost-Justifying Usability, ed. Mayhew, D.J., Academic Press, Inc, Boston, USA, pp.73-110. Gould, J.D. and Lewis, C. 1985, 'Designing for Usability: Key Principles and What Designers Think', Communications of the ACM, 28(3), pp.300-311. Norman, D.A. and Draper, S.W. 1986, User-Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Nielsen, J. 1993, Usability Engineering, Academic Press, San Diego, USA. Bureau of Tourism Research Australia 2002, Australian Tourism Data Card, http://www.btr.gov.au/service/datacard/datacard_action.cfm [17 Mar, 2003]. OpenLS Initiative 2002, Open Location Services, http://www.openls.org/ [6 Nov, 2002]. LIF 2002, Location Interoperability Forum, http://www.openmobilealliance.org/lif/ [13 Jan, 2003].
2602
ENSURING USEFUL CARTOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATIONS IN LOCATION-BASED SERVICES Urquhart, K.1, Cartwright, W.1, Miller, S.1, Mitchell, K.2, Quirion, C.2 and Benda, P.3 1
Department of Geospatial Science, RMIT University, Australia. 2 Webraska Mobile Technologies SA, Asia-Pacific. 3 Sensis Pty. Ltd., Australia. E-mail:
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected] [email protected] ,
[email protected] and
[email protected] Biography Karen Urquhart commenced her PhD candidacy at RMIT University in April 2002, supported by the Australian Research Council under a Commonwealth Government Linkage Scholarship. In 1999 she successfully completed a combined degree, obtaining her Bachelor of Geomatics (with Honours) and Bachelor of Science (Environmental Studies) at the University of Melbourne. During her final year she completed a research project involving the development of prototypical interactive, computer-based, multimedia learning modules for teaching Geographic Information Systems to university students, which earned a High Commendation from the Australian Excellence in Surveying Awards. Following this Karen worked for two and a half years as a Management Consultant with PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting in Melbourne, Australia where her responsibilities included computer subsystem development and management, team leadership as well as regular client consultations. Her current research, entitled “Representation models for the delivery of useful, interactive geospatial information services via the mobile Internet”, is being undertaken in the Department of Geospatial Science and involves a close working relationship with the project’s industry partner Webraska Mobile Technologies. The focus of this research is on the usefulness of geospatial information representations, delivered via small-screen, mobile communication devices, which combines her interest in the everyday use of geospatial data with her project-based industry experience. Karen is a member of the ICA Commission on Maps and the Internet, CHISIG, the British Cartographic Society and the Society of Cartographers
2603
