Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Hammond, N."
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Hammond, N.: Tailoring hypertext for the learner (1991) 0.00 
    0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 2930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=2930,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2930, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2930)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Type
    a
  2. Shum, S.B.; Hammond, N.: Argumentation-based design rationale : what use at what cost? (1994) 0.00 
    0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 8627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=8627,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 8627, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=8627)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A design rationale (DR) is a representation of the reasoning behind the design of an artifact. The use of semiformal notations for structuring arguments about design decision has attracted much interest within the human-computer interaction and software engineering communities, leading to a number of DR notations and support environments. Examines 2 foundational claims made by argumentation-based DR approaches, that expressing DR as argumentation is useful, and that designers can use such notations. The conceptual and empirical basis for these claims is examined by surveying relevant literature on the use of argumentation in non-design context and by surveying DR work. Evidence is classified according to the research contribution it makes, the kind of data on which claims are based, the extent to which the claims made are substantiated, and whether or not the users of the approach were also the researchers
    Type
    a

Themes