About: Evaluating programming systems design

Not logged in : Login

(Sponging disallowed)

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Evaluating programming systems design Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : bibo:AcademicArticle, within Data Space : linkeddata.uriburner.com:28898 associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	http://eprints.org/ontology/ConferenceItemEPrint http://eprints.org/ontology/EPrint Article Academic Article
seeAlso	HTML Summary of #79905 Evaluating programming systems design
http://eprints.org/ontology/hasAccepted	Evaluating programming systems design (PDF)
http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument	Evaluating programming systems design (PDF) Evaluating programming systems design (Other) Evaluating programming systems design (Other) Evaluating programming systems design (Other) Evaluating programming systems design (Other) Evaluating programming systems design (Other)
dc:hasVersion	Evaluating programming systems design (PDF)
Title	Evaluating programming systems design
described by	https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/export_kar_RDFN3.n3 https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/raw.githubusercontent.com/annajordanous/CO644Files/main/export_kar_RDFN3.n3
Date	2019-07-19
Creator	Jonathan Edwards Luke Church Stephen Kell Tomas Petricek
status	peer reviewed unpublished
abstract	Research on programming systems design needs to consider a wide range of aspects in their full complexity. This includes user interaction, implementation, interoperability but also the sustainability of its ecosystem and wider societal impact. Established methods of evaluation, such as formal proofs or user studies, impose a reductionist view that makes it difficult to see programming systems in their full complexity and, consequently, force researchers to adopt simplistic perspectives. This paper asks whether we can create more amenable methods of evaluation derived from existing informal practices such as multimedia essays, demos, and interactive tutorials. These popular forms incorporate recorded or scaffolded interaction, often embedded in a text that guides the reader. Can we augment such forms with structure and guidelines to obtain methods of evaluation suitable for peer review? We do not answer this question, but merely seek to identify some of the problems and instigate a community discussion. In that spirit we propose to hold a panel session at the conference.
Is Part Of	https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/repository
Subject	QA 76 Software, computer programming,
list of authors	https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/79905#authors
presented at	PPIG 2019
is topic of	https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/export_kar_RDFN3.n3 https://raw.githubusercontent.com/annajordanous/CO644Files/main/export_kar_RDFN3.n3
is primary topic of	HTML Summary of #79905 Evaluating programming systems design

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git144 as of Jul 26 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: iSPARQL | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3331 as of Aug 25 2024, on Linux (x86_64-ubuntu_noble-linux-glibc2.38-64), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 15 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software