...
- The user can only perform two very different actions to the webpage. This shortage of choices makes confusion nearly impossible, and therefore eliminates the possibility of capture errors.
- In the collaborative mode, a user can see his own results clearly. So he can easily avoid affecting the other users' results.
- On the other hand, there is no built-in mechanism to prevent a user from deleting another user's result.
Design 3
The underlying philosophy of this design is to allow maximum annotation flexibility by imitating standard text editors. In both the edit mode and share mode below, the right subwindow is dedicated to this editing functionality whereas the left one facilitates fast viewing by displaying the original webpage/shared annotation. This enables users to easily compare their annotated webpages with the original easily. To further support this philosophy, the middle bar marks the differences between the versions of the left and the right.
This does not seem to be much useful if there are just a few annotations. But in a long webpage like the ones for 6.033 papers, users may make many annotations and having an overview of them will be helpful for various reasons, e.g. one can view all annotations without scrolling from top to bottom.
1.1 | | To use WebAnnotator, Jim first logins by entering his username and password. |
1.2 | | He then gets to the Summary Page, in which there are two separate sections showing his previously saved pages and pages shared with other users. The pages are labeled by their titles and other properties. |
1.3 | | He types/pastes the URL of the page to be annotated into the text box (labeled by “pale” URL) and enters/clicks on the “refresh” button. In this case, the URL links to the “Worst is Better” paper for 6.033. |
1.4 | | He then has entered the edit mode. The window is divided into two sections. The left one is just the webpage (Worst is Better). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
