Most recent edit on 2005-04-04 17:58:18 by DerekHansen
Deletions:
Breakout Sessions
During the workshop we broke out into three smaller sessions. Notes from those breakout sessions are discussed in the links below.
Edited on 2005-04-04 17:56:52 by DerekHansen
Additions:
Breakout Sessions
During the workshop we broke out into three smaller sessions. Notes from those breakout sessions are discussed in the links below.
Deletions:
Proposed Breakout Sessions
There are many possible ways to divide up the 24 workshop participants into groups for the breakout sessions. We plan on having two breakout sessions so that each participant will have a chance to meet with different individuals in a smaller group setting. The a.m. breakout session will likely carry over through lunch. The p.m. breakout session will be flexible to accommodate any new arrangements or groups that may form during the course of the day.
We will need to decide how to group ourselves in meaningful ways to facilitate cross-pollination of ideas and potential collaborations. Below is a draft proposal of potential group topics. Please propose new topics, modify the topics to be more (or less) inclusive, or otherwise make any changes. We will be flexible on the day of the workshop, but this will help us save some time during the workshop and make sure that we have meaningful topics for the breakout sessions.
Draft Sub-group Topics
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation. Related topic from MartinWattenberg: post-hoc structuring of conversations with wiki-style editing, for instance a Wikimedia-based set of "model debates".
GroupB: Summarization and distillation of conversation. Topics include: visualizations that summarize large conversation spaces; processes and tools that help individuals or communities distil and summarize a conversation; automated textual summarization techniques;
GroupC: Linking conversation to artifacts. Topics include: methods of integrating conversation and artifacts (e.g., webpages, spreadsheets, pictures);
GroupD: Conversation genres. Topics include: characterizing the features and conventions of conversation genres (e.g., Blogs, Instant messages, encyclopedia entries); discussing the impact of new technologies (e.g., mobile devices) on conversation genres;
GroupE: Organization of conversation. Topics include: personalized message groupings; meta-data; automatic clustering techniques and applications;
GroupF: Recommendations and inter-linking of conversation. Topics include: conversation recommender systems; algorythms for creating soft-links; ways of visualizing linking structures;
GroupG: Access control. Topics include: who has rights to read, write, edit, append (e.g., Wiki); methods for keeping conversations on-topic and dealing with deviant behavior;
GroupH: Conversation Contexts: Topics include: characterizing various conversation contexts (e.g., workgroup, social support, deliberation, scholarly publishing); discussing design features pertinent to different contexts;
GroupI: Visualizing Conversation. Topics include: visualization metaphors; techniques and best practices; promising application areas;
GroupJ: Semiotic Continuity (New). I'd like to see a breakout session that explicitly considers techniques for maintaining coherence when a single unit of conversation has very different context (surrounding conversation units) for the writer and for readers, or for different readers because the system enables multiple (even personalized) views of the conversation. --PaulResnick
Hmm. These are all certainly topics worthy of discussion, though I see a fair amount of overlap among the groups, which may make it hard to decide which group to join. For example, there appears to be significant overlap between B and I, between D and H, and among A, B, and E.
Some or all of these topics are interdependent; for instance, discussions of the efficacy of particular methods of visualization, structuring, or access control may all depend on the particular genre and context of the conversation..
-- KaPingYee
[
JohnRiedl] I also see a lot of overlap. For instance, Group F and Group C are both about linking, in addition to the overlap
KaPing sees. Is there a way to use the overall model to produce more distinct groups? (Overlap of itself is not a disaster, but I'm concerned it might lead to some independent topics getting short shrift if the groups lean towards discussion of the overlapping content.)
[
KushalDave] It strikes me that topical groups are the opposite of what might me most useful. What if everybody declared their primary interest or contribution as "visual design" or "algorithms" or "genre/organization" and we did our best to get an even number of each interest in each subgroup, sort of like picking teams for basketball?
Edited on 2005-04-03 10:19:20 by PaulResnick
Additions:
GroupJ: Semiotic Continuity (New). I'd like to see a breakout session that explicitly considers techniques for maintaining coherence when a single unit of conversation has very different context (surrounding conversation units) for the writer and for readers, or for different readers because the system enables multiple (even personalized) views of the conversation. --PaulResnick
Edited on 2005-04-02 11:07:38 by KushalDave
Additions:
[JohnRiedl] I also see a lot of overlap. For instance, Group F and Group C are both about linking, in addition to the overlap KaPing sees. Is there a way to use the overall model to produce more distinct groups? (Overlap of itself is not a disaster, but I'm concerned it might lead to some independent topics getting short shrift if the groups lean towards discussion of the overlapping content.)
[
KushalDave] It strikes me that topical groups are the opposite of what might me most useful. What if everybody declared their primary interest or contribution as "visual design" or "algorithms" or "genre/organization" and we did our best to get an even number of each interest in each subgroup, sort of like picking teams for basketball?
Deletions:
[JohnRiedl] I also see a lot of overlap. For instance, Group F and Group C are both about linking, in addition to the overlap KaPing sees. Is there a way to use the overall model to produce more distinct groups? (Overlap of itself is not a disaster, but I'm concerned it might lead to some independent topics getting short shrift if the groups lean towards discussion of the overlapping content.)
Edited on 2005-04-02 11:01:05 by dhcp29311.wireless.unc.edu
Additions:
[JohnRiedl] I also see a lot of overlap. For instance, Group F and Group C are both about linking, in addition to the overlap KaPing sees. Is there a way to use the overall model to produce more distinct groups? (Overlap of itself is not a disaster, but I'm concerned it might lead to some independent topics getting short shrift if the groups lean towards discussion of the overlapping content.)
Deletions:
Edited on 2005-04-01 17:06:00 by MartinWattenberg
Additions:
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation. Related topic from MartinWattenberg: post-hoc structuring of conversations with wiki-style editing, for instance a Wikimedia-based set of "model debates".
Deletions:
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation. Related topic from MartinWattenberg: post-hoc structuring of conversations with wiki-style editing?
Edited on 2005-04-01 17:04:39 by MartinWattenberg
Additions:
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation. Related topic from MartinWattenberg: post-hoc structuring of conversations with wiki-style editing?
Deletions:
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation;
Edited on 2005-03-30 06:45:32 by 209-204-144-35.dsl.static.sonic.net
Additions:
Some or all of these topics are interdependent; for instance, discussions of the efficacy of particular methods of visualization, structuring, or access control may all depend on the particular genre and context of the conversation..
Edited on 2005-03-30 06:42:34 by 209-204-144-35.dsl.static.sonic.net
Additions:
Hmm. These are all certainly topics worthy of discussion, though I see a fair amount of overlap among the groups, which may make it hard to decide which group to join. For example, there appears to be significant overlap between B and I, between D and H, and among A, B, and E.
Edited on 2005-03-29 02:44:56 by DerekHansen
Additions:
We will need to decide how to group ourselves in meaningful ways to facilitate cross-pollination of ideas and potential collaborations. Below is a draft proposal of potential group topics. Please propose new topics, modify the topics to be more (or less) inclusive, or otherwise make any changes. We will be flexible on the day of the workshop, but this will help us save some time during the workshop and make sure that we have meaningful topics for the breakout sessions.
Draft Sub-group Topics
Deletions:
We will need to decide how to group ourselves in meaningful ways to facilitate cross-pollination of ideas and potential collaborations. Below is a draft proposal of potential groups. Please propose new groups, modify the groups to be more (or less) inclusive, or otherwise make any changes. We will be flexible on the day of the workshop, but this will help us save some time during the workshop and make sure that we have meaningful topics for the breakout sessions.
Draft Sub-groups
GroupJ:
Oldest known version of this page was edited on 2005-03-29 02:32:34 by DerekHansen []
Page view:
Proposed Breakout Sessions
There are many possible ways to divide up the 24 workshop participants into groups for the breakout sessions. We plan on having two breakout sessions so that each participant will have a chance to meet with different individuals in a smaller group setting. The a.m. breakout session will likely carry over through lunch. The p.m. breakout session will be flexible to accommodate any new arrangements or groups that may form during the course of the day.
We will need to decide how to group ourselves in meaningful ways to facilitate cross-pollination of ideas and potential collaborations. Below is a draft proposal of potential groups.
Please propose new groups, modify the groups to be more (or less) inclusive, or otherwise make any changes. We will be flexible on the day of the workshop, but this will help us save some time during the workshop and make sure that we have meaningful topics for the breakout sessions.
Draft Sub-groups
GroupA: Structured conversation. Topics include: ways of structuring input to conversation; ways of presenting structured conversation;
GroupB: Summarization and distillation of conversation. Topics include: visualizations that summarize large conversation spaces; processes and tools that help individuals or communities distil and summarize a conversation; automated textual summarization techniques;
GroupC: Linking conversation to artifacts. Topics include: methods of integrating conversation and artifacts (e.g., webpages, spreadsheets, pictures);
GroupD: Conversation genres. Topics include: characterizing the features and conventions of conversation genres (e.g., Blogs, Instant messages, encyclopedia entries); discussing the impact of new technologies (e.g., mobile devices) on conversation genres;
GroupE: Organization of conversation. Topics include: personalized message groupings; meta-data; automatic clustering techniques and applications;
GroupF: Recommendations and inter-linking of conversation. Topics include: conversation recommender systems; algorythms for creating soft-links; ways of visualizing linking structures;
GroupG: Access control. Topics include: who has rights to read, write, edit, append (e.g., Wiki); methods for keeping conversations on-topic and dealing with deviant behavior;
GroupH: Conversation Contexts: Topics include: characterizing various conversation contexts (e.g., workgroup, social support, deliberation, scholarly publishing); discussing design features pertinent to different contexts;
GroupI: Visualizing Conversation. Topics include: visualization metaphors; techniques and best practices; promising application areas;
GroupJ: