Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2006-11-11 On-Line Electronic Document Collaboration and Annotation Trev R. Harmon Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the OS and Networks Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Harmon, Trev R., "On-Line Electronic Document Collaboration and Annotation" (2006). Theses and Dissertations. 816. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/816 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. ON-LINE ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT COLLABORATION AND ANNOTATION by Trev R. Harmon A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science School of Technology Brigham Young University December 2006 © 2006 Trev Harmon. Some Rights Reserved. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License and Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 except where noted See Licensing Section for more detail BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COMMITTEE APPROVAL of a thesis submitted by Trev R. Harmon This thesis has been read by each member of the following graduate committee and by a majority vote has been found to be satisfactory. ___________________________ __________________________________________ Date C. Richard Helps, Chair ___________________________ __________________________________________ Date Joseph J. Ekstrom ___________________________ __________________________________________ Date Michael G. Bailey BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY As chair of the candidate’s graduate committee, I have read the thesis of Trev R. Harmon in its final form and have found that (1) its format, citations, and bibliographical style are consistent and acceptable and fulfill university and department style requirements; (2) its illustrative materials including figures, tables, and charts are in place; and (3) the final manuscript is satisfactory to the graduate committee and is ready for submission to the university library. ___________________________ __________________________________________ Date C. Richard Helps Chair, Graduate Committee Accepted for the School __________________________________________ Val D. Hawks Director Accepted for the College __________________________________________ Alan R. Parkinson Dean, Ira A. Fulton College of Engineering and Technology ABSTRACT ON-LINE ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT COLLABORATION AND ANNOTATION Trev R. Harmon School of Technology Master of Science The Internet provides a powerful medium for communication and collaboration. The ability one has to connect and interact with web-based tools from anywhere in the world makes the Internet ideal for such tasks. However, the lack of native tools can be a hindrance when deploying collaborative initiatives, as many current projects require specialized software in order to operate. This thesis demonstrates, with the comparably recent advances in browser technology and Document Object Model (DOM) implementation, a web-based collaborative annotation system can be developed that can be accessed by a user through a standards-compliant web browser. Such a system, demonstrated to work on the commonly-used web browsers constituting the vast majority of web traffic, was implemented using open-source tools and industry-recognized standards. Additionally, it accepts static copies of most standard document formats for both handwritten and typed annotations, while maintaining an archived copy of the original. The system developed for this thesis lends itself to use in a number of different process domains, as most collaborative annotation approaches can be described by a single process model. While a number of possible usage scenarios are discussed, this thesis approaches system usage only in an academic setting, focusing on applicability of the system to electronic grading and document exchange. From here, additional system usage can be easily extrapolated. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my family and friends for their support and belief in my abilities. Also, without my committee, this thesis would not have been possible. I would like to thank my committee chair, Richard Helps, for the many hours of help and consultation, Dr. Joseph Ekstrom for the nucleus idea upon which this thesis is built, and Dr. Michael Bailey for his continual support and encouragement. In addition, Ruth Ann Lowe spent a great deal of time advising and answering a near-endless stream of questions, for which I am very appreciative. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables................................................................................................................... xxv List of Figures................................................................................................................xxvii Glossary.......................................................................................................................... xxix 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................1 1.1. Statement of Problem...............................................................................................2 1.1.1. Usage Scenarios................................................................................................3 1.1.1.1. Document Collaboration...........................................................................4 1.1.1.2. On-line Grading........................................................................................4 1.1.1.3. Discussion Boards.................................................................................... 5 1.1.1.4. In-class Discussion................................................................................... 5 1.1.1.5. Review and Accreditation Boards............................................................ 5 1.1.1.6. In-field Presentations................................................................................6 1.1.2. The Big Picture.................................................................................................6 1.1.3. System Attributes............................................................................................. 7 1.2. Research Questions.................................................................................................. 8 1.3. Constraints and Limitations..................................................................................... 9 2. Literature Review...........................................................................................................11 xv 2.1. Users.......................................................................................................................11 2.1.1. Human............................................................................................................ 12 2.1.2. Computer........................................................................................................ 13 2.2. Process Domains.................................................................................................... 14 2.2.1. Academia........................................................................................................14 2.2.1.1. Electronic Grading..................................................................................14 2.2.1.2. Annotation in the Learning Process........................................................15 2.2.1.2.1. In-class Usage................................................................................. 16 2.2.1.2.2. Out-of-class Usage..........................................................................17 2.2.1.3. Course Management Systems (CMS).....................................................18 2.2.2. Collaboration.................................................................................................. 19 2.2.3. Semantic Web.................................................................................................21 2.2.4. Social Networks..............................................................................................23 2.2.5. Ubiquitous Annotation................................................................................... 23 2.3. Implementations.....................................................................................................24 2.3.1. XLibris............................................................................................................24 2.3.2. ScreenCrayons................................................................................................25 2.3.3. MADCOW..................................................................................................... 26 2.3.4. Annotea...........................................................................................................26 2.3.5. Digital Graffiti................................................................................................27 2.3.6. Tablet PC........................................................................................................28 2.4. Other Observations.................................................................................................28 xvi 2.4.1. Book and Paper Metaphors............................................................................ 28 2.4.2. Free-form