DOCSLIB.ORG

Using Hierarchical Folders and Tags for File Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Using Hierarchical Folders and Tags for File Management Using Hierarchical Folders and Tags for File Management A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Shanshan Ma in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy March 2010 © Copyright 2010 Shanshan Ma. All Rights Reserved. ii Dedications This dissertation is dedicated to my mother. iii Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my advisor Dr. Susan Wiedenbeck. She encouraged me when I had struggles. She inspired me when I had doubts. The dissertation is nowhere to be found if it had not been for our weekly meetings and numerous discussions. I’m in great debts to all the time and effort that she spent with me in this journey. Thank you to my dissertation committee members, Dr. Michael Atwood, Dr. Xia Lin, Dr. Denise Agosto, and Dr. Deborah Barreau, who have guided me and supported me in the research. The insights and critiques from the committee are invaluable in the writing of this dissertation. I am grateful to my family who love me unconditionally. Thank you my mother for teaching me to be a strong person. Thank you my father and my brother for always being there for me. I would like to thank the iSchool at Drexel University for your generosity in supporting my study and research, for your faculty and staff members who I always had fun to work with, and for the alumni garden that is beautiful all year round. Thank you my friends in Philadelphia and my peer Ph.D. students in the iSchool at Drexel University. Those weekdays and weekends that we spent together contributed visibly and invisibly to the completion of my dissertation. A special thanks to Marylin Huff’s help in recruiting participants for my research. I would also like to acknowledge the help from all the Drexel students who participated in my research. iv Table of Contents List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................................ix Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................. x Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 The Research of Personal Information Management (PIM) ................................................................. 3 2.2 File Management with Hierarchical Folders ......................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 The Concept of File, Folder, and File Management ..................................................................... 5 2.2.2 Organizing Files with Hierarchical Folders.................................................................................. 6 2.2.3 Re-finding Files with Hierarchical Folders .................................................................................. 7 2.2.4 The Role of Memory in File Organization and File Re-finding ................................................... 7 2.3 Hierarchical Folders: What Goes Wrong? ............................................................................................ 8 2.3.1 Categorization Ambiguity and Cognitive Difficulty .................................................................... 8 2.3.2 Deep Hierarchy Makes Files Invisible ......................................................................................... 8 2.3.3 Lack of Contextual Reminding Functions .................................................................................... 9 2.3.4 Lack of Regrouping and Restructuring Capabilities .................................................................... 9 2.4 Solutions for Better File Management .................................................................................................. 9 2.4.1 Desktop Search ............................................................................................................................. 9 2.4.2 Beyond Search ........................................................................................................................... 10 2.5 Tagging ............................................................................................................................................... 11 2.5.1 Social Tagging ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.5.2 Using Tagging for File Management ......................................................................................... 12 Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Participants .......................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Materials ............................................................................................................................................. 15 3.2.1 Zotero ......................................................................................................................................... 15 v 3.2.2 Tutorial ....................................................................................................................................... 18 3.2.3 Article Collection ....................................................................................................................... 18 3.2.4 MORAE ..................................................................................................................................... 19 3.3 Experimental Procedure ...................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.1 Pre-task Questionnaire ............................................................................................................... 20 3.3.2 Tutorial ....................................................................................................................................... 20 3.3.3 Experimental Session 1: File Organization ................................................................................ 20 3.3.4 Post-task Questionnaire 1 ........................................................................................................... 21 3.3.5 Experimental Session 2: File Re-finding .................................................................................... 21 3.3.6 Post-task Questionnaire 2 ........................................................................................................... 22 Chapter 4: Quantitative Data Analysis, Results and Discussion .......................................................................... 24 4.1 How Were the Three Groups Different in the File Organization Session? ......................................... 24 4.1.1 File Organization Time .............................................................................................................. 24 4.1.2 Organization Scheme: Number of Folders and Tags Created .................................................... 31 4.2 How Were the Three Groups Different in the File Re-finding Session? ............................................. 35 4.2.1 File Re-finding Time .................................................................................................................. 35 4.2.2 Answer Correctness .................................................................................................................... 36 4.2.3 Number of Mouse Clicks ........................................................................................................... 37 4.3 How Were the Three Groups Different in User Perception? .............................................................. 44 4.3.1 User Perception in the File Organization Session ...................................................................... 44 4.3.2 User Perception in the File Re-finding Session .......................................................................... 46 Chapter 5: Qualitative Discussion on File Organization and File Re-finding ...................................................... 49 5.1 Organizing Files with Folders and Tags ............................................................................................. 49 5.1.1 Previous Models on Tagging and Categorizing ......................................................................... 49 5.1.2 Different Organization Strategies in Creating Folders and Tags ................................................ 49 5.1.3 Single-word and Multi-word in Folder Names and Tag Names ................................................. 54 5.1.4 Folder Names, Tag Names and the Original Article Text .......................................................... 54 vi 5.1.5 Participants’ Feedback from the Questionnaires ........................................................................ 55 5.1.6 Conclusion on File Organization Observation ........................................................................... 56 5.2 Re-finding Files with Folders and Tags .............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Copy on Write Based File Systems Performance Analysis and Implementation
    Copy On Write Based File Systems Performance Analysis And Implementation Sakis Kasampalis Kongens Lyngby 2010 IMM-MSC-2010-63 Technical University of Denmark Department Of Informatics Building 321, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark Phone +45 45253351, Fax +45 45882673 [email protected] www.imm.dtu.dk Abstract In this work I am focusing on Copy On Write based file systems. Copy On Write is used on modern file systems for providing (1) metadata and data consistency using transactional semantics, (2) cheap and instant backups using snapshots and clones. This thesis is divided into two main parts. The first part focuses on the design and performance of Copy On Write based file systems. Recent efforts aiming at creating a Copy On Write based file system are ZFS, Btrfs, ext3cow, Hammer, and LLFS. My work focuses only on ZFS and Btrfs, since they support the most advanced features. The main goals of ZFS and Btrfs are to offer a scalable, fault tolerant, and easy to administrate file system. I evaluate the performance and scalability of ZFS and Btrfs. The evaluation includes studying their design and testing their performance and scalability against a set of recommended file system benchmarks. Most computers are already based on multi-core and multiple processor architec- tures. Because of that, the need for using concurrent programming models has increased. Transactions can be very helpful for supporting concurrent program- ming models, which ensure that system updates are consistent. Unfortunately, the majority of operating systems and file systems either do not support trans- actions at all, or they simply do not expose them to the users.
    [Show full text]
  • THE FUTURE of SCREENS from James Stanton a Little Bit About Me
    THE FUTURE OF SCREENS From james stanton A little bit about me. Hi I am James (Mckenzie) Stanton Thinker / Designer / Engineer / Director / Executive / Artist / Human / Practitioner / Gardner / Builder / and much more... Born in Essex, United Kingdom and survived a few hair raising moments and learnt digital from the ground up. Ok enough of the pleasantries I have been working in the design field since 1999 from the Falmouth School of Art and onwards to the RCA, and many companies. Ok. less about me and more about what I have seen… Today we are going to cover - SCREENS CONCEPTS - DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION - WHY ASSETS LIBRARIES - CODE LIBRARIES - COST EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR IMPLEMENTATION I know, I know, I know. That's all good and well, but what does this all mean to a company like mine? We are about to see a massive change in consumer behavior so let's get ready. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION AS A USP Getting this correct will change your company forever. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION USP-01 Digital transformation (DT) – the use of technology to radically improve performance or reach of enterprises – is becoming a hot topic for companies across the globe. VERY DIGITAL CHANGING NOT VERY DIGITAL DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION USP-02 Companies face common pressures from customers, employees and competitors to begin or speed up their digital transformation. However they are transforming at different paces with different results. VERY DIGITAL CHANGING NOT VERY DIGITAL DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION USP-03 Successful digital transformation comes not from implementing new technologies but from transforming your organisation to take advantage of the possibilities that new technologies provide.
    [Show full text]
  • 11.7 the Windows 2000 File System
    830 CASE STUDY 2: WINDOWS 2000 CHAP. 11 11.7 THE WINDOWS 2000 FILE SYSTEM Windows 2000 supports several file systems, the most important of which are FAT-16, FAT-32, and NTFS (NT File System). FAT-16 is the old MS-DOS file system. It uses 16-bit disk addresses, which limits it to disk partitions no larger than 2 GB. FAT-32 uses 32-bit disk addresses and supports disk partitions up to 2 TB. NTFS is a new file system developed specifically for Windows NT and car- ried over to Windows 2000. It uses 64-bit disk addresses and can (theoretically) support disk partitions up to 264 bytes, although other considerations limit it to smaller sizes. Windows 2000 also supports read-only file systems for CD-ROMs and DVDs. It is possible (even common) to have the same running system have access to multiple file system types available at the same time. In this chapter we will treat the NTFS file system because it is a modern file system unencumbered by the need to be fully compatible with the MS-DOS file system, which was based on the CP/M file system designed for 8-inch floppy disks more than 20 years ago. Times have changed and 8-inch floppy disks are not quite state of the art any more. Neither are their file systems. Also, NTFS differs both in user interface and implementation in a number of ways from the UNIX file system, which makes it a good second example to study. NTFS is a large and complex system and space limitations prevent us from covering all of its features, but the material presented below should give a reasonable impression of it.
    [Show full text]
  • IADIS Conference Template
    www.seipub.org/ie Information Engineering (IE) Volume 3, 2014 Performance and Quality Evaluation of jQuery Javascript Framework Andreas Gizas, Sotiris P. Christodoulou, Tzanetos Pomonis HPCLab, Computer Engineering & Informatics Dept., University of Patras Rion, Patras Received Jun 10, 2013; Revised Jun 21, 2013; Accepted Mar 12, 2014; Published Jun 12, 2014 © 2014 Science and Engineering Publishing Company Abstract devices. Mobile web is the name of this new field of The scope of this work is to provide a thorough web applications and JavaScript is expected to play a methodology for quality and performance evaluation of the major role in its development with the evolution of most popular JavaScript framework, the jQuery Framework, new devices and standards (ex. iPhone, Android) or as by taking into account well established software quality the heart of cross platform applications (like factors and performance tests. The JavaScript programming phonegap.com). There are also proposals for language is widely used for web programming and employing JavaScript in server-side applications increasingly, for general purpose of computing. Since the (Server-Side JavaScript Reference v1.2). growth of its popularity and the beginning of web 2.0 era, many JavaScript frameworks have become available for Due to the plethora of applications that JavaScript programming rich client-side interactions in web serves and the variety of programming needs, applications. The jQuery project and its community serve frameworks have been created in order to help both today as a major part of web programmers. The main programmers and end-users. These frameworks aim to outcome of this work is to highlight the pros and cons of be a useful tool for simplifying JavaScript code jQuery in various areas of interest and signify which and development and repeat blocks of code by using just a where the weak points of its code are.
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystems HOWTO Filesystems HOWTO Table of Contents Filesystems HOWTO
    Filesystems HOWTO Filesystems HOWTO Table of Contents Filesystems HOWTO..........................................................................................................................................1 Martin Hinner < [email protected]>, http://martin.hinner.info............................................................1 1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1 2. Volumes...............................................................................................................................................1 3. DOS FAT 12/16/32, VFAT.................................................................................................................2 4. High Performance FileSystem (HPFS)................................................................................................2 5. New Technology FileSystem (NTFS).................................................................................................2 6. Extended filesystems (Ext, Ext2, Ext3)...............................................................................................2 7. Macintosh Hierarchical Filesystem − HFS..........................................................................................3 8. ISO 9660 − CD−ROM filesystem.......................................................................................................3 9. Other filesystems.................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Web Development India
    WEB DEVELOPMENT INDIA Similar sites like www.tutorialspoint.com www.w3schools.com www.java2s.com www.tizag.com www.mkyong.com www.codecademy.com www.roseindia.net docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/ www.stackoverflow.com tutorials.jenkov.com imp……………………………………………….. http://www.xislegraphix.com/website-types.html http://orthodoxdaily.com/types-of-websites/ http://webstyleguide.com/wsg3/1-process/6-types-of-sites.html http://www.virtualmv.com/wiki/index.php?title=Internet:Types_of_Website http://www.marketingcharts.com/wp/online/which-types-of-websites-do-most-americans-visit- frequently-37970/ http://www.2createawebsite.com/prebuild/website-needs.html http://www.tomakewebsite.com/types-of-websites.html http://one-blog-wonder.tumblr.com/post/29818346464/what-types-of-websites-are-there http://www.roseindia.net/services/webdesigning/corporatewebsitedesign/Different-Kinds-of- Website.shtml http://www.marketingprofs.com/charts/2013/12083/which-types-of-websites-are-visited-most- frequently http://webdesignpeeps.com/types-of-websites/ http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2011/11/navigation-patterns-for-ten-common-types-of- websites/ http://www.teach-ict.com/gcse_new/software/web_design/miniweb/pg2.htm http://www.methodandclass.com/article/what-are-the-different-types-of-web-site http://www.webmasterview.com/2013/03/three-types-of-website/ http://www.chinkin.com/Web-Design/Types-of-Website http://www.designer-daily.com/8-types-of-sites-you-can-build-with-drupal-13924 http://www.mediatopia.co.uk/types-of-websites .................................................................................WEB
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a the Ten Commandments for Websites
    Appendix A The Ten Commandments for Websites Welcome to the appendixes! At this stage in your learning, you should have all the basic skills you require to build a high-quality website with insightful consideration given to aspects such as accessibility, search engine optimization, usability, and all the other concepts that web designers and developers think about on a daily basis. Hopefully with all the different elements covered in this book, you now have a solid understanding as to what goes into building a website (much more than code!). The main thing you should take from this book is that you don’t need to be an expert at everything but ensuring that you take the time to notice what’s out there and deciding what will best help your site are among the most important elements of the process. As you leave this book and go on to updating your website over time and perhaps learning new skills, always remember to be brave, take risks (through trial and error), and never feel that things are getting too hard. If you choose to learn skills that were only briefly mentioned in this book, like scripting, or to get involved in using content management systems and web software, go at a pace that you feel comfortable with. With that in mind, let’s go over the 10 most important messages I would personally recommend. After that, I’ll give you some useful resources like important websites for people learning to create for the Internet and handy software. Advice is something many professional designers and developers give out in spades after learning some harsh lessons from what their own bitter experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • File Systems
    “runall” 2002/9/24 page 305 CHAPTER 10 File Systems 10.1 BASIC FUNCTIONS OF FILE MANAGEMENT 10.2 HIERARCHICAL MODEL OF A FILE SYSTEM 10.3 THE USER’S VIEW OF FILES 10.4 FILE DIRECTORIES 10.5 BASIC FILE SYSTEM 10.6 DEVICE ORGANIZATION METHODS 10.7 PRINCIPLES OF DISTRIBUTED FILE SYSTEMS 10.8 IMPLEMENTING DISTRIBUTED FILE SYSTEM Given that main memory is volatile, i.e., does not retain information when power is turned off, and is also limited in size, any computer system must be equipped with secondary memory on which the user and the system may keep information for indefinite periods of time. By far the most popular secondary memory devices are disks for random access purposes and magnetic tapes for sequential, archival storage. Since these devices are very complex to interact with, and, in multiuser systems are shared among different users, operating systems (OS) provide extensive services for managing data on secondary memory. These data are organized into files, which are collections of data elements grouped together for the purposes of access control, retrieval, and modification. A file system is the part of the operating system that is responsible for managing files and the resources on which these reside. Without a file system, efficient computing would essentially be impossible. This chapter discusses the organization of file systems and the tasks performed by the different components. The first part is concerned with general user and implementation aspects of file management emphasizing centralized systems; the last sections consider extensions and methods for distributed systems. 10.1 BASIC FUNCTIONS OF FILE MANAGEMENT The file system, in collaboration with the I/O system, has the following three basic functions: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to ISO 9660
    Disc Manufacturing, Inc. A QUIXOTE COMPANY Introduction to ISO 9660, what it is, how it is implemented, and how it has been extended. Clayton Summers Copyright © 1993 by Disc Manufacturing, Inc. All rights reserved. WHO IS DMI? Disc Manufacturing, Inc. (DMI) manufactures all compact disc formats (i.e., CD-Audio, CD-ROM, CD-ROM XA, CDI, PHOTO CD, 3DO, KARAOKE, etc.) at two plant sites in the U.S.; Huntsville, AL, and Anaheim, CA. To help you, DMI has one of the largest Product Engineering/Technical Support staff and sales force dedicated solely to CD-ROM in the industry. The company has had a long term commitment to optical disc technology and has performed developmental work and manufactured (laser) optical discs of various types since 1981. In 1983, DMI manufactured the first compact disc in the United States. DMI has developed extensive mastering expertise during this time and is frequently called upon by other companies to provide special mastering services for products in development. In August 1991, DMI purchased the U.S. CD-ROM business from the Philips and Du Pont Optical Company (PDO). PDO employees in sales, marketing and technical services were retained. DMI is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Quixote Corporation, a publicly owned corporation whose stock is traded on the NASDAQ exchange as QUIX. Quixote is a diversified technology company composed of Energy Absorption Systems, Inc. (manufactures highway crash cushions), Stenograph Corporation (manufactures shorthand machines and computer systems for court reporting) and Disc Manufacturing, Inc. We would be pleased to help you with your CD project or answer any questions you may have.
    [Show full text]
  • Model-Based Failure Analysis of Journaling File Systems
    Model-Based Failure Analysis of Journaling File Systems Vijayan Prabhakaran, Andrea C. Arpaci-Dusseau, and Remzi H. Arpaci-Dusseau University of Wisconsin, Madison Computer Sciences Department 1210, West Dayton Street, Madison, Wisconsin {vijayan, dusseau, remzi}@cs.wisc.edu Abstract To analyze such file systems, we develop a novel model- based fault-injection technique. Specifically, for the file We propose a novel method to measure the dependability system under test, we develop an abstract model of its up- of journaling file systems. In our approach, we build models date behavior, e.g., how it orders writes to disk to maintain of how journaling file systems must behave under different file system consistency. By using such a model, we can journaling modes and use these models to analyze file sys- inject faults at various “interesting” points during a file sys- tem behavior under disk failures. Using our techniques, we tem transaction, and thus monitor how the system reacts to measure the robustness of three important Linux journaling such failures. In this paper, we focus only on write failures file systems: ext3, Reiserfs and IBM JFS. From our anal- because file system writes are those that change the on-disk ysis, we identify several design flaws and correctness bugs state and can potentially lead to corruption if not properly present in these file systems, which can cause serious file handled. system errors ranging from data corruption to unmountable We use this fault-injection methodology to test three file systems. widely used Linux journaling file systems: ext3 [19], Reis- erfs [14] and IBM JFS [1].
    [Show full text]
  • 430 File Systems Chap
    430 FILE SYSTEMS CHAP. 6 6.4 EXAMPLE FILE SYSTEMS In the following sections we will discuss several example file systems, rang- ing from quite simple to highly sophisticated. Since modern UNIX file systems and Windows 2000’s native file system are covered in the chapter on UNIX (Chap. 10) and the chapter on Windows 2000 (Chap. 11) we will not cover those systems here. We will, however, examine their predecessors below. 6.4.1 CD-ROM File Systems As our first example of a file system, let us consider the file systems used on CD-ROMs. These systems are particularly simple because they were designed for write-once media. Among other things, for example, they have no provision for keeping track of free blocks because on a CD-ROM files cannot be freed or added after the disk has been manufactured. Below we will take a look at the main CD- ROM file system type and two extensions to it. The ISO 9660 File System The most common standard for CD-ROM file systems was adopted as an International Standard in 1988 under the name ISO 9660. Virtually every CD- ROM currently on the market is compatible with this standard, sometimes with the extensions to be discussed below. One of the goals of this standard was to make every CD-ROM readable on every computer, independent of the byte order- ing used and independent of the operating system used. As a consequence, some limitations were placed on the file system to make it possible for the weakest operating systems then in use (such as MS-DOS) to read it.
    [Show full text]
  • File Systems Performance Analysis
    File Systems Performance Analysis Benchmarking project for the lecture Computer Performance Analysing And Benchmarking lectured by Prof. Thomas M. Stricker at Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Written by Stefan Rondinelli File Systems Performance Analysis Project CONTENTS 0 Introduction 2 1 The Environment 2 1.1 The Hardware 2 1.2 The Software 3 2 Performing the Benchmark 4 2.1 The Proceeding 4 2.2 The Output 5 3 Statistical Analysis of the Data 6 3.1 Computation of Effects 6 3.2 Confidence Intervals 7 3.3 Are the File Systems Significantly Different? 8 4 References 10 - 1 - File Systems Performance Analysis Project 0 Introduction Every operating system has its own file systems. For example Windows uses FAT16(File Allocation Table 16(bits)), FAT32(File Allocation Table 32) and NTFS(Windows NT File System), Linux uses Minix fs, Extended fs and ext2 and a Mac has its (discarded) MFS(Macintosh file system) and HFS(Hierarchical File System) file systems. Sometimes file systems of other operating systems are supported what for example is desired in a dual boot system (e.g. Linux and Windows). When using such a dual boot machine with Linux and Windows, the performance of a file system could be one of the considerations when choosing what file systems to use for the different partitions. In this project I am going to benchmark some file systems and finally to analyze the gathered data statistically as learned in the lecture. 1 The Environment 1.1 The Hardware I used the following hardware for the performance analysis: - CPU: AMD K6II 450Mhz (has a 64kB cache) - RAM: 64MB SDRAM - Hard disk 1: Western Digital Caviar 36400 (6 GB) - Hard disk 2: Western Digital Caviar 33200 (3 GB) - Disk controller: IDE for both hard disks To have the same conditions these components affecting the I/O speed must be the same ones for all the measurements of the performance of the different file systems otherwise the differences in the measured data would rather be due to unequal hardware then to the different implementation of a file system.
    [Show full text]