GEO Label:user and producer perspectives on a label for geospatial data

One of the aims of the Science and Technology Committee (STC) of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) was to establish a GEO Label- a label to certify geospatial datasets and their quality. As proposed, the GEO Label will be used as a value indicator for geospatial data and datasets accessible through the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). It is suggested that the development of such a label will significantly improve user recognition of the quality of geospatial datasets and that its use will help promote trust in datasets that carry the established GEO Label. Furthermore, the GEO Label is seen as an incentive to data providers. At the moment GEOSS contains a large amount of data and is constantly growing. Taking this into account, a GEO Label could assist in searching by providing users with visual cues of dataset quality and possibly relevance; a GEO Label could effectively stand as a decision support mechanism for dataset selection. Currently our project - GeoViQua, - together with EGIDA and ID-03 is undertaking research to define and evaluate the concept of a GEO Label. The development and evaluation process will be carried out in three phases. In phase I we have conducted an online survey (GEO Label Questionnaire) to identify the initial user and producer views on a GEO Label or its potential role. In phase II we will conduct a further study presenting some GEO Label examples that will be based on Phase I. We will elicit feedback on these examples under controlled conditions. In phase III we will create physical prototypes which will be used in a human subject study. The most successful prototypes will then be put forward as potential GEO Label options. At the moment we are in phase I, where we developed an online questionnaire to collect the initial GEO Label requirements and to identify the role that a GEO Label should serve from the user and producer standpoint. The GEO Label Questionnaire consists of generic questions to identify whether users and producers believe a GEO Label is relevant to geospatial data; whether they want a single "one-for-all" label or separate labels that will serve a particular role; the function that would be most relevant for a GEO Label to carry; and the functionality that users and producers would like to see from common rating and review systems they use. To distribute the questionnaire, relevant user and expert groups were contacted at meetings or by email. At this stage we successfully collected over 80 valid responses from geospatial data users and producers. This communication will provide a comprehensive analysis of the survey results, indicating to what extent the users surveyed in Phase I value a GEO Label, and suggesting in what directions a GEO Label may develop. Potential GEO Label examples based on the results of the survey will be presented for use in Phase II.

A study of new product market search and user adoption

The research was carried out in the Aviation Division of Dunlop Limited and was initiated as a search for more diverse uses for carbon/carbon composites. An assumed communication model of adoption was refined by introducing the concept of a two way search after making cross industry comparisons of supplier and consumer behaviour. This research has examined methods of searching for new uses for advanced technology materials. Two broad approaches were adopted. First, a case history approach investigated materials that had been in a similar oosition to carbon/carbon to see how other material producing firms had tackled the problem. Second, a questionnaire survey among industrialists examined: the role and identity of material decision makers in different sized firms; the effectiveness of various information sources and channels; and the material adoption habits of different industries. The effectiveness of selected information channels was further studied by monitoring the response to publicity given to carbon/carbon. A flow chart has been developed from the results of this research which should help any material producing firm that is contemplating the introduction of a new material to the world market. Further benefit to our understanding of the innovation and adoption of new materials would accrue from work in the followino areas: "micro" type case histories; understanding more fully the role of product champions or promoters; investigating the phase difference between incremental and radical type innovations for materials; examining the relationship between the adoption rate of new materials and the advance of technology; studying the development of cost per unit function methods for material selection; and reviewing the benefits that economy of scale studies can have on material developments. These are all suggested areas for further work.

Are web designers resisting the inclusion of social cues when creating website user interface?

Using the resistance literature as an underpinning theoretical framework, this chapter analyzes how Web designers through their daily practices, (i) adopt recursive, adaptive, and resisting behavior regarding the inclusion of social cues online and (ii) shape the socio-technical power relationship between designers and other stakeholders. Five vignettes in the form of case studies with expert individual Web designers are used. Findings point out at three types of emerging resistance namely: market driven resistance, ideological resistance, and functional resistance. In addition, a series of propositions are provided linking the various themes. Furthermore, the authors suggest that stratification in Web designers’ type is occurring and that resistance offers a novel lens to analyze the debate.