This HTML5 document contains 28 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n2https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/
wdrshttp://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#
dchttp://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/
n5http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status/
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n10https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/subject/
n12https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/raw.githubusercontent.com/annajordanous/CO644Files/main/
n6http://eprints.org/ontology/
n13https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/event/
bibohttp://purl.org/ontology/bibo/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n4https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/79905#
n7https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/document/
n14https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n16https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/
n9https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/person/
n18https://kar.kent.ac.uk/79905/

Statements

Subject Item
n2:79905
rdf:type
bibo:Article bibo:AcademicArticle n6:ConferenceItemEPrint n6:EPrint
rdfs:seeAlso
n18:
n6:hasAccepted
n7:3200730
n6:hasDocument
n7:3200768 n7:3200847 n7:3200848 n7:3200849 n7:3200850 n7:3200730
dc:hasVersion
n7:3200730
dcterms:title
Evaluating programming systems design
wdrs:describedby
n12:export_kar_RDFN3.n3 n16:export_kar_RDFN3.n3
dcterms:date
2019-07-19
dcterms:creator
n9:ext-jonathanmedwards@gmail.com n9:ext-t.petricek@kent.ac.uk n9:ext-luke@church.name n9:ext-s.r.kell@kent.ac.uk
bibo:status
n5:peerReviewed n5:unpublished
bibo: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.
dcterms:isPartOf
n14:repository
dcterms:subject
n10:QA76
bibo:authorList
n4:authors
bibo:presentedAt
n13:ext-870168ff945777ea767033dab73aa51c