Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

MDWA: a model-driven Web augmentation approach—coping with client- and server-side support

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Software and Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Web augmentation is a set of techniques allowing users to define and execute software which is dependent on the presentation layer of a concrete Web page. Through the use of specialized Web augmentation artifacts, the end users may satisfy several kinds of requirements that were not considered by the analysts, developers and stakeholders that built the application. Although some augmentation approaches are contemplating a server-side counterpart (to support aspects such as collaboration or cross-browser session management), the augmentation artifacts are usually purely client-side. The server-side support increases the capabilities of the augmentations, since it may allow sharing information among users and devices. So far, this support is often defined and developed in an ad hoc way. Although it is clear that server-side support brings new possibilities, it is also true that developing and deploying server-side Web applications is a challenging task that end users hardly may handle. This work presents a novel approach for designing Web augmentation applications based on client-side and server-side components. We propose a model-driven approach that raises the abstraction level of both, client- and server-side developments. We provide a set of tools for designing the composition of the core application with new features on the back-end and the augmentation of pages in the front-end. The usability and the value of the produced augmentations have been evaluated through two experiments involving 30 people in total.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Web Scraper, https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/web-scraper/jnhgnonknehpejjnehehllkliplmbmhn?h1=es.

  2. Evernote, https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/evernote-web-clipper/pioclpoplcdbaefihamjohnefbikjilc?hl=es-419.

  3. https://sites.google.com/site/webobjectambient/.

  4. https://github.com/pmaglione/mdwa_comments.

  5. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHuNJBFXxaLCXzK_0pTkANEZ9RXsUsCSO.

  6. Examples documentation and videos https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PVSGmClH8MbVvJpeGq7eeuo7Yojqf9CE.

  7. Tumpermonkey—https://www.tampermonkey.net/.

  8. https://www.lowes.com, last accessed May 17th 2019.

  9. https://www.amazon.com, last accessed May 17th 2019.

  10. http://www.tractorsupply.com, last accessed May 17th 2019.

  11. http://www.greasespot.net.

  12. http://www.arg-agro.com.ar/.

  13. http://www.arg-agro.com.ar/, last accessed Feb 12th 2018.

  14. http://www.semillas-organicas.com.ar/, last accessed Feb 12th 2018.

  15. https://www.easy.com.ar/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/es/easyar, last accessed Feb 12th 2018.

  16. http://www.agropoints.com/, last accessed Feb 12th 2018.

  17. https://www.teamviewer.com/en/, last accessed Feb 20th 2018.

  18. https://crossorigin.me.

References

  1. Garrido, A., Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Grigera, J., Medina-Medina, N., Harari, I.: Personalized web accessibility using client-side refactoring. IEEE Internet Comput. 17(4), 58 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Díaz, O., Arellano, C., Iturrioz, J.: In: Web Engineering, 10th International Conference, ICWE 2010, Vienna, Austria, July 5–9, 2010. Proceedings, pp. 233–247 (2010)

  3. Firmenich, S., Bosetti, G., Rossi, G., Winckler, M.: In: Current Trends in Web Engineering - ICWE: International Workshops, DUI, TELERISE, SoWeMine, and Liquid Web, Lugano, Switzerland, 6–9 June 2016. Revised Selected Papers, pp. 200–207 (2016)

  4. Wischenbart, M., Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Wimmer, M.: In: Proceedings of the Joint Workshop on Interfaces and Human Decision Making for Recommender Systems, IntRS 2015, co-located with ACM Conference on Recommender Systems (RecSys 2015), Vienna, Austria, 19 Sept 2015, pp. 53–60 (2015)

  5. Diigo (2017). https://www.diigo.com/

  6. DDway: Calculation of the functional size and productivity with the IFPUG method (CPM 4.3.1). The DDway experience with WebRatio (2016). http://www.webratio.com/website/documentation/Case_Study_Productivity_with_WebRatio.pdf

  7. Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., Wimmer, M.: Model-Driven Software Engineering in Practice, vol. 1. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, Los Altos (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Panach Navarrete, J.I., Dieste, O., Marin, B., Espana, S., Vegas, S., Pastor, O., Juristo, N.: Evaluating model-driven development claims with respect to quality: a family of experiments. In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2018.2884706

  9. Martínez, Y., Cachero, C., Meliá, S.: MDD vs. traditional software development: a practitioner’s subjective perspective. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(2), 189 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Urbieta, M., Frajberg, D., Rossi, G.: Assessing the impact of volatile functionality removal in web applications: model-driven vs code-based approaches. Softw. Pract. Exp. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2503

  11. Martínez, Y., Cachero, C., Meliá, S.: Empirical study on the maintainability of web applications: model-driven engineering vs code-centric. Empir. Softw. Eng. 19(6), 1887 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Panach, J.I., España, S., Dieste, S., Pastor, S., Juristo, N.: Assessing data analysis performance in research contexts: an experiment on accuracy, efficiency, productivity and researchers’ satisfaction. Inf. Softw. Technol. 62, 164 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tarr, P., Ossher, H., Harrison, W., Sutton, S.M.: In: Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002), pp. 107–119 (1999)

  14. Firmenich, S., Bosetti, G.A., Rossi, G., Winckler, M., Barbieri, T.: In: Web Engineering—16th International Conference, ICWE 2016, Lugano, Switzerland, 6–9 June 2016. Proceedings, pp. 77–95 (2016)

  15. WebRatio. WebRatio Platform (2017). http://www.webratio.com/site/content/en/web-application-development

  16. Urbieta, M., Firmenich, S., Maglione, P., Rossi, G., Olivero, M.A.: In APMDWE. INSTICC, ScitePress (2017)

  17. Díaz, O., Arellano, C.: The augmented web: rationales, opportunities, and challenges on browser-side transcoding. TWEB 9(2), 8 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., Riedl, J.: In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work—CSCW ’00, pp. 241–250 (2000)

  19. Firmenich, D., Firmenich, S., Rivero, J.M., Antonelli, L., Rossi, G.: CrowdMock: an approach for defining and evolving web augmentation requirements. Requirements Eng. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-016-0257-3

  20. Díaz, O., Sosa, J.D., Trujillo, S.: In: 24th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media (part of ECRC), HT ’13, Paris, France—02–04 May, 2013, pp. 69–78 (2013)

  21. Firmenich, S., Garrigós, I., Wimmer, M.: In: Web Engineering, 14th International Conference, ICWE 2014, Toulouse, France, 1–4 July 2014. Proceedings, pp. 359–369 (2014)

  22. Ceri, S., Dolog, P., Matera, M., Nejdl, W.: In: Koch, N., Fraternali, P., Wirsing, M. (eds.) Web Engineering: 4th International Conference, ICWE 2004, Munich, Germany, 26–30 July 2004. Proceedings, pp. 201–214. Springer, Berlin (2004)

  23. Díaz, O., Arellano, C., Azanza, M.: A language for end-user web augmentation: caring for producers and consumers alike. ACM Trans. Web 7(2), 9:1 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Winckler, M., Palanque, P.: An approach for supporting distributed user interface orchestration over the web. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 72(1), 53 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Aldalur, I., Winckler, M., Díaz, O., Palanque, P.: In: Paternò, F., Wulf, V. (eds.) New Perspectives in End-User Development, pp. 433–459. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)

  26. Díaz, O., Aldalur, I., Arellano, C., Medina, H., Firmenich, S.: Web mashups with webmakeup. In: Communications in Computer and Information Science (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28727-0_6

  27. Firmenich, D., Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Winckler, M., Distante, D.: User interface adaptation using web augmentation techniques: towards a negotiated approach. In: Cimiano, P., Frasincar, F., Houben, G.J., Schwabe, D. (eds.) Engineering the Web in the Big Data Era, pp. 147–164. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2015)

  28. Aldalur, I., Diaz, O.: In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems (ACM, New York, NY, USA), EICS ’17, pp. 45–50 (2017)

  29. Bosetti, G., Firmenich, S., Gordillo, S.E., Rossi, G., Winckler, M.: An end user development approach for mobile web augmentation. Mob. Inf. Syst. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2525367

  30. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, Boston, MA (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Rossi, G., Pastor, S., Schwabe, D., Olsina, L.: Web Engineering: Modelling and Implementing Web Applications, vol. 12. Springer, London (2008)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Aragón, G., Escalona, M.J., Lang, M., Hilera, J.R.: An analysis of model-driven web engineering methodologies. In: International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control, vol 9, pp 413–436 (2013)

  33. Domínguez-Mayo, F.J., Escalona, M.J., Mejías, M., Ross, M., Staples, G.: Towards a homogeneous characterization of the model-driven web development methodologies. J. Web Eng. 13(1&2), 129 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Object Management Group. http://www.omg.org

  35. Interaction flow modeling language. http://www.omg.org/spec/IFML/

  36. Lowe, D., Henderson-Sellers, B., Gu, A.: In: International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, pp. 105–119. Springer (2002)

  37. Brambilla, M., Fraternali, P.: Interaction Flow Modeling Language: Model-Driven UI Engineering of Web and Mobile Apps with IFML. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Popovici, A., Gross, T., Alonso, G.: In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development, AOSD ’02, pp. 141–147. ACM, New York, NY (2002)

  39. Rossi, G., Nieto, A., Mengoni, L., Lofeudo, N., Silva, L.N., Distante, D.: In: 2006 Fourth Latin American Web Congress, pp. 179–188 (2006)

  40. Ginzburg, J., Distante, D., Rossi, G., Urbieta, M.: Oblivious integration of volatile functionality in web application interfaces. J. Web Eng. 8(1), 25 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Firmenich, S., Rossi, G., Urbieta, M., Gordillo, S., Challiol, C., Nanard, J., Nanard, M., Araujo, J.: Engineering concern-sensitive navigation structures, concepts, tools and examples. J. Web Eng. 9(2), 157 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mikkonen, T., Systä, K., Pautasso, C.: In: Cimiano, P., Frasincar, F., Houben, G.J., Schwabe, D. (eds.) Engineering the Web in the Big Data Era: 15th International Conference, ICWE 2015, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 23–26 June 2015, Proceedings, pp. 134–143. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2015)

  43. Ginzburg, J., Rossi, G., Urbieta, M., Distante, D.: In: Baresi, L., Fraternali, P., Houben, G.J. (eds.) Web Engineering: 7th International Conference, ICWE 2007 Como, Italy, 16–20 July 2007 Proceedings, pp. 152–166. Springer, Berlin (2007)

  44. Urbieta, M., Rossi, G., Distante, D., Ginzburg, J.: Modeling, deploying, and controlling volatile functionalities in web applications. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 22, 129 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Frajberg, D., Urbieta, M., Rossi, G., Schwinger, W.: In: Bozzon, A., Cudre-Maroux, P., Pautasso, C. (eds.) Web Engineering: 16th International Conference, ICWE 2016, Lugano, Switzerland, 6–9 June 2016. Proceedings, pp. 59–76. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2016)

  46. Brooke, J.: SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Eval. Ind. 189(194), 4–7 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction, vol. 15. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell (2000)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Hwang, W., Salvendy, G.: Number of people required for usability evaluation: the 10\(\pm \)2 rule. Commun. ACM 53(5), 130 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M.: Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation, 1st edn. Springer Publishing Company, Berlin (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of the Project 691249, RUC-APS: Enhancing and implementing Knowledge based ICT solutions within high Risk and Uncertain Conditions for Agriculture Production Systems (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union under their funding scheme H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Facultad de Informática, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, calle 50 y 120, 1900, La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Matias Urbieta, Sergio Firmenich, Gabriela Bosetti, Pedro Maglione & Gustavo Rossi

  2. CONICET, La Plata, Argentina

    Matias Urbieta, Sergio Firmenich & Gustavo Rossi

  3. Web Engineering and Early Testing Group, Computer Languages and Systems Department, University of Seville, Avda. Reina Mercedes S/N, 41012, Seville, Spain

    Miguel Angel Olivero

  4. ISTI - CNR, Pisa, Italy

    Miguel Angel Olivero

Authors
  1. Matias Urbieta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sergio Firmenich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gabriela Bosetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pedro Maglione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gustavo Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Miguel Angel Olivero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matias Urbieta.

Additional information

Communicated by Prof. Joerg Kienzle.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Surveys used in the experiments

Surveys used in the experiments

The next surveys were used on both experiments. Only a subset of question was used only in the toolset evaluation for assessing the perception about the approach.

1.1 Initial survey

This survey aims at gathering information about subject user.

  • Nationality

  • Age

  • Gender

  • Current level of education:

  • My training focuses mainly on the field of:

  • Occupation/job position:

  • How often do you use the Web?

  • How many years have you been using the Web?

  • How often do you use a Web browser in your daily activities?

  • Do you know about browser extensions?

  • How often do you use extensions for Web browsers in general?

  • What *desktop* Web browser do you use frequently?

1.2 Final survey

This survey is twofold: system usability scale questions and additional inquiring questions:

  • SUS

    • I think that I would like to use this system frequently.

    • I found the system unnecessarily complex.

    • I thought the system was easy to use.

    • I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this system.

    • I found the various functions in this system were well-integrated.

    • I thought there was too much inconsistency in this system.

    • I would imagine that most people would learn to use this system very quickly.

    • I found the system very cumbersome to use.

    • I felt very confident using the system.

    • I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this system.

  • Additional questions (only for the toolset usability evaluation)

    • Start time of the experiment

    • End time of the experiment

    • Do you think the tool was hard to use? Why?

    • What other uses of the tool do you come up with?

    • Did you detect any problem in the use of the tool? Which one(s)?

    • Do you think there are aspects of the tool that can be improved? Which ones?

    • Do you have any other comments about the tool, the approach or the experiment?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Urbieta, M., Firmenich, S., Bosetti, G. et al. MDWA: a model-driven Web augmentation approach—coping with client- and server-side support. Softw Syst Model 19, 1541–1566 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00779-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00779-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation