Dene Grigar, Frode Hegland, Fabien Bénétou, Mark Anderson, Peter Wasilko

AI Summary

The development meeting focused on improving the demo experience for an XR authoring environment, particularly how to structure the demonstration flow, capture feedback, and create meaningful interactions for users.

Dene Grigar emphasized the importance of gathering useful feedback during demos rather than just showing features, suggested different demo approaches for different audience types, and advocated for using “space” rather than “room” terminology to move away from skeuomorphic concepts. She recommended collecting data through Qualtrics and mentioned she would think about potential project names.

Frode Hegland was concerned with creating a polished, impressive demo experience with a “wow moment” for users, focused on effective questioning methodology, suggested hiding technical elements like the console for non-technical users, and emphasized the need to distinguish between published (immutable) knowledge objects and editable content being authored.

Fabien Bénétou stressed the importance of getting inspiration for next steps from demos rather than repeating demonstrations, emphasized that different audiences would need different demo approaches, highlighted technical limitations of certain hand gestures, and pointed out the challenges of supporting both technical and non-technical users in the same demo flow.

Mark Anderson contributed insights about the nature of knowledge objects in the system, clarified how published versus unpublished content should be treated conceptually, suggested ways to query and manipulate spatial arrangements of objects, and emphasized the importance of understanding the problem being solved when designing interactions.

Peter Wasilko provided a legal perspective on citing immutable versus mutable content, suggested decoupling artifacts from interface affordances, and recommended thinking about the conceptual model before implementation details.

Issues Raised and Proposed Solutions:

1. Project Naming
   • Issue: The project lacks a clear, memorable name
   • Solution: Dene will consider name options drawing from Greek mythology or scholarly terminology
2. Demo Experience Structure
   • Issue: Different audience types need different demo approaches
   • Solution: Create a sequence of demo steps that can be adapted or skipped based on audience expertise
3. Console and Technical Elements
   • Issue: Technical elements like console may confuse non-technical users
   • Solution: Hide console by default but make it accessible via wrist tap for those who need it
4. Feedback Gathering
   • Issue: Need structured approach to collect user feedback
   • Solution: Create standardized questions, use Qualtrics, and allow for qualitative exploration
5. Knowledge Object Representation
   • Issue: No clear visual distinction between published documents and works in progress
   • Solution: Develop visual cues and different interaction affordances for different object types
6. Spatial Interaction Grammar
   • Issue: Need intuitive gestures for manipulating objects in space
   • Solution: Develop context-sensitive gestures that only work in specific areas or on specific object types
7. Open Source Management
   • Issue: Code availability and contribution process unclear
   • Solution: Fabien has published code with proper license; will also publish to university GitHub

Decisions Made:

1. Create a dev log to document decisions, disagreements, and solutions
2. Use “step” instead of “room” or “space” terminology
3. Keep demos adaptable to different audience types
4. Hide console by default for non-technical users
5. Develop standardized questions for gathering feedback
6. Use Qualtrics for data collection
7. Focus on creating an impressive final demonstration step that highlights spatial capabilities

Action Items:

1. Dene will consider project name ideas during her flight home
2. Fabien will share source code with the university GitHub
3. Frode will document suggestions for gesture interactions with images
4. Team will develop a set of standard questions for feedback
5. Frode will update the dev log with meeting notes
6. Mark may add additional fields to the JSON demo data to support new features