TAPoR 2.0 will, as of June 1st 2012, officially available for use at http://tapor.ca

The TAPoR Portal has being redesigned from the ground up. These wiki pages are dedicated to the redesign project.

The old portal will continue to be available at http://portal.tapor.ca

• Personas - Who we imagine will use the new portal and how.
• Wireframes - Early design ideas.
• Voting/Recommendation Scans - Scan of different voting and recommendation designs.
• Tags - What categories should we have.
• Comment System - Discussion of how to handle comments.

• Interface Improvements and New Features - A list of features and improvements suggested by the Advisory Board and others.

Tool Testing and Reviewing

• Tool Testing Guidelines - This is a set of guidelines for methodical testing of the TAPoR set of tools.
• Review Guidelines - This is an outline of the reviews we are commissioning for tools. These will go into comments that are fixed.

• Just What Do They Do? is a SSHRC funded project to look at what text analysis users do. It includes subprojects to model new ways to help users discover tools. Co-investigators include Geoffrey Rockwell, Lisa Given, Eleni Stroulia, and Stéfan Sinclair. Amy Dyrbye, Lisa Goddard, Ali Grotkowski, and Joseph Dung have been Humanities Computing Research Assistants working on this project.

• Terms Listing - This is list of specialized terminology found in both the TAPoR and Voyant toolsets. It will eventually be migrated over to Hermineuti.ca as a help resource for users of those toolsets.

• Meeting Jan 17th, 2012 between Kamal and Geoffrey on TAPoR 2.0

• Objectives of Redesign - An outline of our objectives.

• Portal Comparison - This is a comparison of the TAPoR tools found at the McMaster and the University of Alberta portals, to assist tool usage interviews. Also included is a list of the tools found at the University of Alberta portal's wiki.

• Just What Do They Do? is a SSHRC funded project to look at what text analysis users do. It includes subprojects to model new ways to help users discover tools. Co-investigators include Geoffrey Rockwell, Lisa Given, Eleni Stroulia, and Stéfan Sinclair. Joseph Dung is a Humanities Computing Research Assistant working on this project.

• Tool Testing Guidelines - This is a set of guidelines for methodical testing of the TAPoR set of tools.

Ideas for the Portal Redesign

• Meeting July 21st, 2011 between Kamal and Geoffrey on the test version

• Review Guidelines - This is an outline of the reviews we are commissioning for tools. These will go into comments that are fixed.

• Meeting June 29th, 2011 between Kamal and Geoffrey on the test version

• Meeting May 6th, 2011 between Kamal and Geoffrey

• Comment System

• Comments - What do we want for commenting?

• Do We Need Accounts?

• Meeting April 4th between Kamal and Geoffrey

• Tags

• Voting/Recommendation Scans

Meeting Notes

• Meeting March 18

• Wireframes

• Portal Front Page Features - What information do we want on the home page of the portal

• Backend Issues

Portal Move

Note: The TAPoR Portal is moving Monday November 22nd at 9:00am Mountain time. For more infomations see TAPoR Portal Move.

• Personas
• Research Statement

• TAPoR Volunteers are people who are helping us with the redesign.

Design Process

• Environmental Scan - This is where we are gathering ideas about the interface.

Knowledge engine:

//* The quality of the current scans vary and I hope to revisit them later. Please note that this is still a work in progress*//

* Knowledge engine:

Started by Stephen Wolfram as a “computational knowledge engine”, it has also been regarded as a possible competitor to Google. It uses ontologies and human curated data to return an answer with graphs and other representations.

* The Knowledge Engine's Results Page:

Its ontology system also affects the way results are displayed in category boxes.

* Duckduckgo:

Another engine that attempts categorizing according to subject area is Duckduckgo. Its results are a mashup from many search engine sources and Wikipedia. It is also well known for its zero-info click.

* Amazon:

Amazon also tries to categorize items on its page. The interesting thing about this page is that after searching for an item on Amazon days earlier, Amazon was still able to “remember me” and still list those items on its page when I merely visit the page (without searching). It also suggests what others have been looking for. * Google Books:

Google also categorizes its books according to subject area and other criteria, including Trending Topics. It lists book items in rows of icon tiles.

* LinguistList^?:

Linguistlist hosts an array of projects, publications, conferences their famous Jobs page. Notice that featured projects get displayed in a bold banner at the top center of the screen to get people’s attention. The links below the Technology heading repeat the contents of the banner for emphasis. Links lead to research projects and tools developed by partners.

* Linguistlist1:

Its famous Jobs page is also a source of information for students and researchers about the kinds of tools industry and academia are using.

* Linguistlist2:

Linguistlist uses both Google and its own search program for its database.

* Natural Language Toolkit:

The NLTK site is a great resource for Python related Natural Language Processing Tools and Projects.

* NLTK Project Ideas:

The NLTK ideas page tracks the development of various projects.

* Open Source NLP:

The Open NLP site is a simple page that has links and a description to various NLP tool sites.

* Reddit's voting system:

The simplicity of Reddit has made it overtake Digg in some circles. Users get to vote on news items in a transparent way. This is one way users gauge what is popular on and off the web. Notice the “Up” and “Down” arrows. Evidently, Reddit triggers far more comments and heated discussions than Digg.

* Digg's voting system:

Aggregating sites like Digg are indeed more colorful but there is only one “Up” arrow and now “Down” arrow, so people can only vote to show they are interested and abstain to show they are not.

* Youtube:

Youtube is a social site where people share videos which gets organized according to Category Filters that fine-tunes what one is searching for.

* Youtube's voting system:

The “like” icon on Youtube as in everywhere, is a kind of vote. It is still open to research if users prefer the like icon (with hands and fingers down or up) or if up and down arrows still do the trick.

* Flickr:

Flickr collects photo image items and organizes them in rows of tiles. A Flickr tag also functions as a filter when clicked on. In this sense the tag “Family” is also a category.

* Flickr2:

A Flickr word cloud.

* Flickr3:

It also has an interesting archive feature. An image on a date represents a collection of images snapped on that date.

* Alternative pic navigation:

Microsoft’s Photosynth pushes the boundary in its photo navigation system by stitching together a collection of images in a seamless way. It provides an alternative way to navigate a list of items like images. But what about text or hypertext links? A badge could aggregate URLs from multiple blogs and compare and contrast word contents remotely, in a single statistical display.

* Interesting Badge that shows tools, links and tweets based on the subject of a blog:

Postup makes badges for blogs and in this particular case depending on the subject matter of that blog, it simulates a scrolling feed of icons and texts in that box.

TAPoR Redesign Project

The TAPoR Portal is being moved from McMaster to the University of Alberta. As part of the move we are fixing various bugs and speeding up the portal. The next step is to redesign the portal based on input from users. These wiki pages are dedicated to this redesign project.

How to get involved

• Send an email to Kirsten Uszkalo (circe at ufies dot org) describing how you would like to be involved
• Send an email to Kamal Ranaweera (kamal dot ranaweera at ualberta dot ca) and ask to be added to the email discussion group.

Design Ideas

Tool and Badge Bazaar

• Types of Tools - What types of tools should we be gathering (with examples)
• Tool Fields - What information do we want to gather about each tool

People Involved

• Project Leads: Geoffrey Rockwell, Kirsten Uszkalo, and Stéfan Sinclair
• TAPoR Advisory Board is a board advising in the redesign.
• Just What Do They Do? is a SSHRC funded project to look at what text analysis users do. It includes subprojects to model new ways to help users discover tools. Co-investigators include Geoffrey Rockwell, Lisa Given, Eleni Stroulia, and Stéfan Sinclair. Joseph Dung is a Humanities Computing Research Assistant working on this project.

-- GeoffreyRockwell - 08 Oct 2010