Necessity of methodologies to model Rich Internet Applications J.C. Preciado, M. Linaje, F. Sánchez University of Extremadura {jcpreciado; mlinaje; fernando}@unex.es
Abstract Several methodologies and tools have been proposed for Web applications design and development. However, traditional Web applications are still inadequate to support the interaction and presentation functionalities demanded by the users. Recently, Rich Internet Applications (RIAs) have been proposed as an answer to these problems providing new levels of interactivity and presentation. The use of RIAs is growing exponentially; nevertheless there is a lack of full development methodologies in this sense. This document outlines the main features which should be modeled in RIAs and proposes an evaluation process in order to obtain the suitability of a methodology to accomplish this goal. We also use this process to evaluate the suitability of several existing Web, Multimedia and Hypermedia methodologies to demonstrate that each one accomplishes only few RIA features, so new methodologies or extensions of the actual methodologies become necessary.
1. Introduction The Web Engineering community has proposed new methodologies and tools to support the design, development, and maintenance of Web applications. They can be specified at a high level of abstraction, and in many cases the final application can be automatically generated from these abstract specifications. However, the current methodologies and tools are incomplete or inadequate to answer to the new functionalities that users demand to Web applications, such as, for example, effective integration of audio and video and high level of interactivity. The use of Rich Internet Applications (RIAs) [25] [31] answers to such needs through the introduction of rich contents that can be delivered on different devices. At the one hand, RIAs allow to embed audio, video and other media contents under one plug-in installation
S. Comai Politecnico di Milano
[email protected]
(such as Flash Player or Java). On the other hand, RIAs guarantee high performance levels for any kind of data by avoiding continuous page refreshment. After presenting the main features of RIAs in more detail, this paper will analyze the characteristics of several of the current proposed Web, Multimedia and Hypermedia methodologies. As we will see, none of the current approaches are able to represent the complexity of these applications completely. The aim of this paper is to establish the necessity of new methodologies or extensions for the actual ones in order to model RIAs.
1.1. Paper organization This document is structured as follows: Section 2 shows the main features of RIA technologies and the process for comparing the existing methodologies with respect to the RIA features is proposed. Then, Sections 3, 4 and 5 present several of the most representative methodologies in the Web, Multimedia and Hypermedia fields, respectively, and evaluation results are summarized. Section 6 compares the results of the evaluation processes. Finally, Section 7 outlines the conclusions and future work.
2. Traditional Web applications and RIAs This section point out the traditional Web applications problems and present the characteristics of the RIAs as a solution to such problems. Then, RIA comparison parameters and a comparison process to use with Web, Multimedia and Hypermedia methodologies are fixed.
2.1. Traditional Web application problems Traditional Web applications present the following main problems [5] [25]:
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
x
x
x
x
Process problems: complex Web applications often require that the user navigates through a series of pages to complete a single task (e.g. the task of booking a flight). Data Problems: they do not support interactive explorations of the data. Usually, the user has to search data through the use of input forms and then to navigate the hypertext to see the desired data. Different data visualization and interactive manipulation in an effective way would reduce the complexity of the data shown to the user. Configuration problems: many Web applications require the configuration of a product/system from multicriteria choices, but are, in general, unable to present the customized product/system to the user in an intuitive way and in a single step. Feedback Problems: they do not allow a continued and ordered interaction without page refreshments, so the interaction of the user with traditional Web pages is quite limited.
Macromedia FLEX presentation servers.
and
[26]
Table 1 presents the characteristics generally requested by RIAs (as reported also in [5] [16] [25] [26]). With respect to the typical features of RIAs we consider also the availability of a Tool CASE as another important comparison parameter. The paper considers such parameters in order to establish the suitability of the methodologies presented in the next sections. Table 1. Comparison parameters Interaction Multimedia
Tool CASE Visual continuity Synchronization
N-Tier Development Dynamic data retrieval Parallel requests to different sources Personalization
Interactive collaboration
Possibility to specify the user (active) behaviours Possibility to support the representation of graphics, audio, video, streaming and live multimedia Availability of a tool CASE supporting the methodology Possibility to avoid screen refreshments and blink experiences to provide an active (related with user interaction) and a passive (related with predefined behaviours) representation of interface elements Possibility to provide separate layers Possibility to carry data to/from the server at run time Possibility to retrieve data from one or more simultaneous sources, both in a synchronous and asynchronous way Extensions for internationalization and localization, accessibility, multi-device access, etc. It allows real-time interactive collaboration between different users in order to work together on the same task.
2.4. Comparison process In order to establish the suitability of any methodology to model and develop RIAs, we have fixed a specific comparison process based on a four level degrees process. Each degree represents the particular methodology capability to model the comparison parameters shown in Table 1. Suitability of each comparison parameter is represented by one of the following Coverage Degrees: x
x
Desired Coverage Degree (DES), which represents that the feature is covered by the methodology and it is ideal to represent RIAs Partial Coverage Degree (PAR), which is used when the parameter is moderately covered
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
OpenLaszlo
2.3. RIA comparison parameters
2.2. RIAs as a possible solution Traditional Web applications have been extended in several directions to improve interactivity and ease of use. In particular, [5] defines Web Interactive Applications (WIAs) as Web based applications where programs that are run on client side use the Web infrastructure in order to reach end-users, usually by mean of a plug-in installation on the client-browser. RIAs belong to such category, since they eliminate from the server the presentation and interactive layers and minimize the data transfers between the server and the clients. RIAs allow to build rich applications with data and multimedia contents, high interactivity, thus increasing the capabilities offered by the traditional Web applications. RIA is the fusion of the interactive and multimedia user interface functionality of desktop applications with the Web applications. This technology does not try to replace XHTML, because this language still remains perfect for representing simple data (including graphs and photos) without high interaction levels. At the moment RIAs do not solve all the problems of the Web applications, but they solve the current problematic situations commented in section 2.1. Nowadays RIAs can be implemented in multiple development platforms such as, for example,
[16]
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
x
x
Limited Coverage Degree (LIM), which represents very few support towards RIA features None Coverage Degree (NON) is used when the feature is not covered at all.
Each Coverage Degree has a specific weight and our process penalizes those methodologies in which Partial or Desired Coverage Degree are not reached. In this evaluation the proposed weights are: DES = 4, PAR = 3, LIM = 1 and NON = 0. In this paper we have selected a representative set of fifteen methologies among the Web, Multimedia, and Hypermedia approaches proposed in literature. This selection has been done mainly according to previous researches [4] [5] [10] [19] [34]. The selected methodologies have been examined one at a time in order to obtain the comparison parameters (from Table 1). As evaluation case, a specific Rich Internet Application called COLEARNING [27] has been modeled. To our knowledge, COLEARNING is the first application based on RIA that allows the creation and management of mind maps working in a collaborative and real time way. Such application requires all the features represented by the comparison parameters. In this sense, this application is enough to make our comparison process.
3. Web Engineering Web Engineering is defined as the process for creating, implanting and maintaining Web systems of high quality [1]. This discipline has emerged recently, with the aim to handle all the aspects of the development of complex Web systems [2].
3.1. Web methodologies HDM (Hypertext Design Model) [29] was proposed as an extension to the entity relationship model. This method was the first model proposed for modeling hypertexts, and therefore it has been used as a base for other methodologies. WSDM (Web Site Design Method) [18] is a Web system development method, based on a life cycle composed of four stages: the user model design, the conceptual design, the implementation design and the implementation. RMM (Relationship Management Methodology) [15] is based on the entity relationship model. The RMM model of development consists of seven iterative and parallel executed stages.
HMBS/M (Hypermedia Model Based on Statecharts/Method) methodology uses formal representation techniques based on Statecharts [20] [28] to define the structures of content and navigation of the Web system, separating the information and the structure. OOHDM (Object Oriented Hypermedia Design Model) [6] is one of the methodologies widely accepted for the development of Web applications. It is a direct descendant of HDM and is based on OO concepts. UWE (UML-Based Web Engineering) [36] is a modern proposal based on UML for the development of Web applications, and it is based on the Object Oriented model. This methodology has been later extended with a new process model. OO-H (Object Oriented Hypermedia) [17] is one of the recent methodologies regarding the modeling and implementation processes of the Web applications derived from the OO approaches. This methodology defines a conceptual model based on UML and extends it. WebML (Web Modeling Language) [3] [7] is another language for the high-level description of a Web system consisting of a data model, a hypertext model, a presentation model and a personalization model. It is built on several previous proposals for hypermedia and Web design languages, including HDM, RMM, and OOHDM. WebML has also been integrated with workflow specifications, Web services [33], and context-awareness features [35] among others. W2000 [21] extends HDM with a new business logic layer. Designers can specify both the single operations that can be invoked by the user as well as the logical transactions that define the services supplied by the application. Through a MOF metamodel, W2000 allows a precise and flexible definition of all modeling concepts and can be easily extended. Many other proposals have been studied [4][5][34], such as, for example, Strudel, Araneus, SOHDM, SWM, RNA, ADM, WNDL, HSDL, HSM and ACE.
3.2. Evaluation of the Web Engineering approaches We have evaluated the methodologies commented throughout section 3.1 with respect to the parameters that are considered fundamental for RIA applications shown in Section 2.3. The results are summarized in Table 2.
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Table 2. Web-RIA comparison Interaction Multimedia Tool CASE Visual continuity Synchroniz. N-Tier Development Dynamic data retrieval Parallel requests to different sources Personalization Interactive collaboration
HDM
WSDM
RMM
HMBS
OO HDM
UWE
OO-H
WebML
W2000
LIM NON LIM
LIM NON NON
LIM NON LIM
LIM LIM LIM
PAR NON PAR
PAR NON PAR
PAR NON PAR
PAR NON PAR
LIM NON PAR
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
PAR
LIM
LIM
LIM
PAR
LIM
PAR
PAR
PAR
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
PAR
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
LIM
PAR
PAR
PAR
LIM
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
LIM
LIM
LIM
NON
4. Multimedia Engineering Multimedia Engineering is defined as the process to create, implant and maintain high quality multimedia systems [1] [4]. Multimedia applications focus on interaction and synchronization mechanisms of multimedia objects. Temporal relationship between elements of media presentation is indeed the key characteristic of multimedia applications [4]. Both, the synchronization of the scene to be rendered (predefined temporal behaviour) and the alteration of the presentation caused by the user interaction (controlled interactive behaviours) need to be considered [8] [12] [30].
4.1. Multimedia methodologies OMMMA (Object Oriented Modeling of Multimedia Applications) is a multimedia methodology with its own language (OMMMA-L). OMMMA-L [8] is an Object Oriented modeling standard language derived from UML that models the aspects needed for the development of multimedia applications. OMMMA-L adopts the UML classes diagram to express the multimedia application model, but it extends these classes in order to express the elements that UML is not able to represent. Indeed, UML does not support all the parameters necessary to model multimedia applications [8]. DMM+t (Dynamic Meta Modeling - with specification time) [12] extends from the OMMMA approach and proposes a variant of the UML sequence diagrams to model the time control of multimedia presentations. In this aspect it differs from the OMMMA approach. Thanks to the use of temporary values in the attributes of the media objects it is possible to synchronize the application at a certain point of time. DMM+t uses then graphical transformations based on rules denominated UML Collaborations.
DEMAIS (Designing Multimedia Applications with Storyboards) [13] is a sketch-based, interactive multimedia storyboard tool that uses a designer’s ink strokes and textual annotations as an input design vocabulary. However, it does not represent a complete methodology at all. DENIM [23] is another example of electronic sketching tool for early multimedia interface design with different views but these kinds of proposals do not represent real Multimedia Engineering, since they do not support maintenance or reusability.
4.2. Evaluation of the Multimedia Engineering approaches Table 3 illustrates the evaluation of the multimedia engineering approaches shown in Section 4.1 with respect to the RIA parameters that have been summarized in Table 1. Table 3. Multimedia-RIA compararison OMMMA
DMM+t
DEMAIS
Interaction
PAR
PAR
LIM
Multimedia
PAR
PAR
LIM
Tool CASE
NON
NON
LIM
Visual continuity
PAR
PAR
PAR
Synchronization
LIM
PAR
LIM
N-Tier Development
LIM
LIM
LIM
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
NON
Dynamic data retrieval Parallel requests sources Personalization
to
Interactive collaboration
different
5. Hypermedia engineering Many hypermedia proposals fall in between Web and Multimedia approaches. Many of such hybrid methodologies stem from Web methodologies and extend them with synchronization elements and/or interactivity elements, or have been originally defined for multimedia and then extended towards the Web.
5.1. Hypermedia methodologies The HMT (Hypermedia Modeling Technique) [14] modeling methodology is able to represent interactivity and hypermedia elements. It offers a set of primitives with possibilities of temporal interdependences and external data acquisition.
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This methodology was created to fulfill the Web Engineering deficiency to represent audio, video, slideshows, animations and so on. The base of this methodology is RMM. The HFPM (Hypermedia Flexible Process Modeling) [11] methodology proposes is described on the basis of different views: functional, methodological, informative and behavioral. AHAM (Adaptive Hypermedia Architecture Model) is a model whose engine AHA! [9] was originally developed to support an on-line course. AHAM is a Dexter-based model for adaptive hypermedia systems. There are other proposals such as AHM that descend from the Dexter’s model [22], but they present analogous problems to the methodologies considered in this section.
5.2. Evaluation of Hypermedia Engineering Approaches
AHA HFPM
Interaction
HMT Multimedia
DEMAIS
Tool CASE
DMM+t Visual continuity
OMMMA
Synchronization
W2000 N-Tier Development
WebML OO-H
Dynamic data retrieval
UWE
Parallel requests to different sources
OO-HDM HMBS
Personalization
RMM WSDM
Interactive collaboration
HDM 0
In Table 5 we summarize the comparison of HMT, HFPM and AHAM with respect to the RIA parameters. Table 4. Hypermedia-RIA comparison HMT
HFPM
AHAM
Interaction
PAR
PAR
PAR
Multimedia
PAR
PAR
PAR
Tool CASE
NON
NON
PAR
Visual continuity
PAR
PAR
PAR
Synchronization
PAR
PAR
PAR
N-Tier Development
PAR
PAR
PAR
Dynamic data retrieval
LIM
NON
PAR
Parallel requests to different sources
LIM
NON
PAR
Personalization
LIM
NON
PAR
Interactive collaboration
NON
NON
NON
6. Results of the evaluation process Figure 1 shows a graphical summary that includes the results obtained from the evaluation process proposed in Section 2.4 with respect to the Web, Multimedia, and Hypermedia methodologies commented in this document. Axis x corresponds to the Coverage Degree of each methodology that is symbolized by axis y.
5
10
15
Figure 1. Summarized comparison
From such results we can deduce that the most modern proposals in the Web Engineering field allow a good interaction level, which is however quite limited to model RIA. Some of these methodologies have tool CASE support for the automatic code generation. Their development is based on N-Tier architectures and these tools are partially suited for being extended towards RIA. However, most of the Web methodologies do not support multimedia properly, being their focus on hypertext applications. Visual continuity is not guaranteed and synchronization is neither supported. Instead, dynamic data retrieval and parallel requests to different sources are partially supported by most of the Web Engineering approaches. Personalization is partially supported by these methodologies to represent RIAs. Currently, most of the modern approaches are being extended towards personalization support. Real-time interactive collaboration is very limited, and it is offered only by the most recent Web methodologies. The most recent Web methodologies (OOHDM, OO-H, UWE, WebML, and W2000) seem to be quite flexible for future extensions towards RIA. However, indispensable comparison parameters within RIA, such as multimedia, visual continuity, synchronization and interactive collaboration are only partially supported or are not supported at all by these methodologies. The answering to this lacks can be found inside the Multimedia Engineering approaches.
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
20
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Most of the multimedia proposals are final-user oriented. They are mainly based on high visual impact elements, and that is the reason why they give special attention to the presentation layer, while there is a light support for the remaining layers. From the point of view of this evaluation, DMM+t results the most complete model, but it does not focus on Web applications, so it does not cover all the other requirements of RIA applications. Some initiatives of Web modeling techniques such as RMM [15] have been interpreted by some authors as adaptable initiatives to model multimedia applications [8], but have been discarded by other authors due to the fact they do not fulfill the basic parameters of multimedia applications. Many of the Web methodologies are considered by some authors as hypermedia methodologies. Even other previous studies [19] [32] conclude that none of the proposed methodologies are appropriate to model complete hypermedia systems, to guarantee the maintenance, testing, and so on. Another problem is that, until now, we have not found complete CASE tools that automatically generate multimedia applications based on complete multimedia engineering models. Table 3 shows, on the one hand, that all multimedia methodologies that have been analyzed support, at different levels, the diverse aspects that characterize most of the multimedia applications (such as synchronization, interaction, and so on). And on the other hand, other essential RIA requirements, such as data retrieval, personalization or interactive collaboration, are not considered. From the evaluation of the Hypermedia methodologies shown in this work, HMT is the most complete model, although it does not fully cover all the requirements inside RIA. In general, the Hypermedia Methodologies, although they should provide a combination of Web and Multimedia aspects, result still primitive [10] and need to be extended to support RIA applications, according to the parameters described in Section 2.3.
7. Conclusions and future work This paper presented the main characteristics of RIAs and it reviewed several methodologies for the Web, Multimedia, and Hypermedia application development. None of the methodologies in these fields are suited to model applications that respond to the main requirements of the RIA technology. However, it has
been proved that their combination presents most of the required characteristics. RIA offers new functionalities, where the multimedia and the interactivity make the rules [24]. We stress the necessity to provide a modeling approach for the RIA technologies, since at the moment methodologies in this area are missing. We also believe that, as result of its technological characteristics and requirements, the current methodologies cannot be directly applied to model and generate RIAs. Experiences in the Web, Multimedia and Hypermedia fields should help in the definition of RIA methodologies. Due to the results shown in Figure 1, the most suited approaches to be extended towards RIA functionalities are represented by the Web and the hypermedia methodologies. As future work we plan to extend WebML using the advantages of the other methodologies considered in this paper to model RIA features. Indeed, WebML, although it lacks all the multimedia, synchronization and interaction aspects, is extensible and very flexible.
10. References [1] Murugesan, S. and Deshpande, Y, ICSE'99 workshop on Web Engineering, 21st international conference on Software Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Angeles, 1999, pp. 693 – 694, ISBN:1-58113-074-0 [2] Dart S. A., Configuration management: the missing link in Web Engineering, Artech House, 2000, ISBN:1-58053098-2 [3] Ceri S., Fraternali P., Bongio A., Brambilla M., Comai S., and Matera M., Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications, Morgan Kauffmann, 2002, ISBN: 1-55860843-5 [4] Koch, N., “A Comparative Study of Methods for Hypermedia Development”, Technical Report 9905, LudwigMaximilians-University Munchen, 1999. [5] Christodoulou S. P., Styliaras G. D. and Papatheodorou T. S., “Evaluation of Hypermedia Application Development and Management Systems”. 9th ACM conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, ACM Press, Pittsburgh, 1998, pp. 1 - 10, ISBN:0-89791-972-6. [6] Schwabe, D., Rossi, G. and Barbosa, S., “Systematic Hypermedia Design with OOHDM”, 7th ACM International Conference on Hypertext, ACM Press, Washington, 1996, pp. 116 - 128, ISBN:0-89791-778-2 [7] Ceri, S., Fraternali, P. and Bongio, A., “Web Modeling Language (WebML): a Modeling Language for Designing Web Sites”, 9th International WWW Conference, Amsterdam, 2000, pp. 137 - 157, ISSN:1389-1286. [8] Sauer, S. and Engels, G., “Extending UML for Modeling of Multimedia Applications”, IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, Tokyo, 1999, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 80.
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[9] De Bra P. and Calvi L., “AHA! An open Adaptive Hypermedia Architecture”, The New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, Taylor Graham Publishers, 1998, vol. 4, pp. 115-139. [10] Lang M. and Fitzgerald, B., “Hypermedia Systems Development Practices: A Survey”, IEEE Software, IEEE Computer Society, 2005, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 68-75. [11] Olsina L., “Building a Web-based information system applying the hypermedia flexible process modeling strategy”, 1st International Workshop on Hypermedia Development with ACM Hypertext’98, Pittsburgh, 1998. [12] Hausmann J.H., Heckel R. and Sauer S., “Towards Dynamic Meta Modeling of UML Extensions: An Extensible Semantics for UML Sequence Diagrams”, Human Centric Computing Languages and Environments, IEEE Computer Society, Italy, 2001. ISBN:0-7695-0474-4. [13] Bailey, B.P., Konstan, J.A., and Carlis, J.V., “DEMAIS: Designing Multimedia Applications with Interactive Storyboards”, 9th ACM international conference on Multimedia, ACM Press, Ottawa, 2001, ISBN:1-58113394-4. [14] Specht G. and Zoller P., “HMT: Modeling Temporal Aspects in Hypermedia Applications”, 1st International Conference on Web-Age Information Management, SpringerVerlag, Shanghai, 2000, pp. 256-270, ISBN:3-540-67627-9. [15] Isakowitz T., Stohr E. A. and Balasubramanian P., “RMM: A Methodology for Structured Hypermedia Design”, Communications of the ACM, ACM Press, vol 38, is. 8, 1995, pp. 34-44, ISSN:0001-0782. [16] Macromedia HomePage: http://www.macromedia.com/ [17] Gómez J. and Cachero C., “OO-H Method: extending UML to model web interfaces”, Information modeling for internet applications, Idea Group Publishing, 2003, ISBN:1591-40050-3 [18] De Troyer O., and Leune J., “WSDM: a user centered design method for Web sites”, 7th international conference on World Wide Web. Australia, 1998, pp.85 - 94, ISSN:0169-7552. [19] Lang M., “Hypermedia Systems Development: Do We Really Need New Methods?”, IS2002 Proceedings, http://proceedings.informingscience.org/IS2002Proceedings/ papers/Lang148Hyper.pdf [20] Harel D., “Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems”. Science of Computer Programming, Elsevier North-Holland, vol. 8 is. 3, p. 231-274, 1987, ISSN:01676423. [21] Baresi L., Garzotto F. and Maritati M., “W2000 as a MOF Metamodel”, 6th World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics - Web Engineering track, vol. I Orlando, 2002. [22] Hardman L., Bulterman D. C. A. and Rossum G. van, “The Amsterdam Hypermedia Model: adding time and
context to the Dexter model”, Communications of the ACM, ACM Press, vol. 37 is. 2 pp. 50 - 62, 1994, ISSN:0001-0782. [23] Lin J., Newman M. W., Hong J.I. and Landay J. A., “DENIM: finding a tighter fit between tools and practice for Web site design”. Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, The Hague, 2000, ISBN:158113-216-6. [24] Macromedia Webminars: Rich Internet Applications http://mmse-emea.p51.breezecentral.com/p57622310/ [25] Duhl J., “Rich Internet Applications”, IDC white papers, 2003, http://www.idc.com [26] Open Lazlo Home Page: http://www.openlaszlo.org [27] Preciado J.C., Masero V., Castañera D. and Gil C., “Mapas conceptuales para enseñar cooperativamente vía web”. 1st Internacional Conference on Concept Mapping, Pamplona, 2004. [28] Turine M.A.S., Oliveira M.C.F. and Masiero P. C., “HySCharts: A Statechart-Based Environment for Hyperdocument autoring and Browsing”, Multimedia Tools and Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 8 is. 3, pp. 309-324, 1999, ISSN:1380-7501. [29] Garzotto F., Paolini P. and Schwabe, D., “HDM: a model-based approach to hypertext application design”, ACM Transactions on Information Systems, ACM Press, 1993, vol. 11 is. 1 pp. 1 - 26, ISSN:1046-8188. [30] Facca F. M., Ceri S., Armani J. and Demaldé, V. “Building Reactive Web Applications”, 14th International World Wide Web Conference, ACM Press, Japan, 2005, ISBN:1-59593-051-5. [31] Rich Internet applications session, SIGGRAPH Conference on Web graphics, California, 2003. [32] Lang M., “Issues and Challenges in the Development of Hypermedia Information Systems”, BIT 2001, In Hackney R., Manchester Metropolitan University: Manchester, 2001, ISBN 0-905304-38-1. [33] Brambilla M., Ceri S., Comai S., Fraternali P. and Manolescu I., “Model-driven Specification of Web Services Composition and Integration with Data-intensive Web Applications”, IEEE Bulletin of Data Engineering, 2002. [34] Fraternali P., “Tools and Approaches for Developing Data-Intensive Web Applications: A Survey”, ACM Computing Surveys, ACM Press, vol. 31 is. 3 pp. 227-263, 1999, ISSN:0360-0300. [35] Ceri S., Daniel F., Matera M., “Extending WebML for Modeling Multi-Channel Context-Aware Web Applications”, WISE - MMIS’03 Workshop, IEEE Press, pp. 225-233, Roma, 2003. [36] Koch N., Kraus A., Cachero C. and Meliá S., “Integration of Business Processes in Web Application Models”, Journal of Web Engineering, Rinton Press, vol. 3 is.1 pp. 22 - 49, 2004.
Proceedings of the 2005 Seventh IEEE International Symposium on Web Site Evolution (WSE’05) 0-7695-2470-2/05 $20.00 © 2005
IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Downloaded on May 25, 2009 at 20:58 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
