<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jones, Jasmine</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ackerman, Mark S.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Curating an Infinite Basement: Understanding How People Manage Collections of Sentimental Artifacts</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Supporting Group Work</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collection management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">curation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">digital curation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">digital memento</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">family memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">memorabilia</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">memory artifacts</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pervasive computing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">sentimental artifacts</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ubicomp</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">87–97</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Valuable memories are increasingly captured and stored as digital artifacts. However, as people amass these digital mementos, their collections are rarely curated, due to the volume of content, the effort involved, and a general lack of motivation, which can result in important artifacts being obscured and forgotten in an accumulation of content over time. Our study aims to better understand the challenges and goals of people dealing with large collections, and to provide insight into how people select and pay attention to large collections of digital mementos. We conducted an interpretivist analysis of forum data from UnclutterNow.com, where participants discussed issues they face in curating the sentimental artifacts in their homes. We uncovered a number of social, temporal, and spatial affordances and concerns that influence the ways that people curate their memories, and discuss how curation is closely tied to how people use storage and display in their home. In our study, we drew out and unpack &quot;curation regimes&quot; as patterns that people enact to focus the attention they are able to pay to the artifacts in their collections. We close with a discussion of the design opportunities for memory artifacts, which support and facilitate the curatorial processes of users managing digital mementos in everyday life.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Huh, Jina</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark W. Newman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ayse G Büyüktür</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Progressive Scenarios: A Rapid Method for Understanding User Interpretations of Technology</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 16th ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP ’10)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ambiguity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">multiple interpretations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pervasive</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pervasive environments</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scenario-based design</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ubicomp</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">usercentered design</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/2010</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;For emerging group technologies that require evaluations on long-term use and social norms, assumptions, and implicit rules that develop around the technologies, standard usability testing may not be adequate. At the same time, field based research that allows for observing technology use over long-term is costly in terms of time. In this paper, we present a rapid method that we call progressive scenarios, which could help replicate the processes by which interpretations evolve over time in natural settings and how invisible assumptions and social norms dictate the technology use. Using a preliminary design concept of a publicly available ambient personal information and communication system, we demonstrate how the method helped to elicit design implications.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>5</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Margaret S Elliott</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kraemer, Kenneth L</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The politics of design: Next generation computational environments</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computerization movements and technology diffusion: From mainframes to ubiquitous computing</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pervasive</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Semantic Web</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">socio-technical</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">socio-technical design</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">socio-technical evolution</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ubicomp</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2008</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information Today</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">New York</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This paper describes and analyzes two next-generation computational environments and their architectures: the Semantic Web and pervasive computing. Each of these necessarily carries with it political assumptions about how the environments will be used, and these political assumptions are reflected in the accompanying computerization movement’s rhetoric. However, unlike &quot;first growth&quot; computerization efforts, both the Semantic Web and pervasive computing will result within a growing infrastructure that does not allow topdown design (or even overall design) but within which new designs must fit. The underlying assumptions for both environments are largely libertarian but with differing modalities of user control. This paper examines the libertarian assumptions, the promise of democratization in one but not the other, and the resulting conceptual tensions surrounding these two second-generation computerization movements.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ackerman, Mark</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Darrell, Trevor</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Weitzner, Daniel J</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Privacy in context</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Human–Computer Interaction</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IoT privacy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational context</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">pervasive</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">privacy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">social context</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ubicomp</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2001</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">16</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">167–176</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Context-aware computing offers the promise of significant user gains-the ability for systems to adapt more readily to user needs, models, and goals. Dey, Abowd, and Salber (2001) present a masterful step toward understanding context-aware applications. We examine Dey et al. in the light of privacy issues-that is, individuals&#039; control over their personal data-to highlight some of the thorny issues in context-aware computing that will be upon us soon. We argue that privacy in context-aware computing, especially those with perceptually aware environments, will be quite complex. Indeed, privacy forms a co-design space between the social, the technical, and the regulatory. We recognize that Dey et al. is a necessary first step in examining important software engineering concerns, but future research will need to consider how regulatory and technical solutions might be co-designed to form a public good.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>