'Split personalities' for scientific databases: targeting database middleware and interfaces to specific audiences

Scientific researchers are anxious to discover new insights into the relationships and interactions among the exceedingly diverse components of our physical, biological and ecological environment. To do this, individual scientists must be able to synthesize conclusions from data drawn from disciplines outside their domains of expertise. While key datasets have already been brought online, they are housed in diverse agencies, using different database software on a variety of platforms. This paper explores the problems in providing middleware and interface support for these autonomous research databases (ARD''s). The development of interfaces to ARD''s is complicated by the fact that potential end-users range from highly specialized research scientists to the general public. To adequately support such diverse users, the interface must assume different "personalities." We describe how interfaces can be targeted to three categories of end-users: domain specialists, non-domain specialists, and students. By automating the activities that are most frustrating, time-consuming, or error-prone, target-specific interfaces can significantly improve database usability. There is also heterogeneity among the people who must develop ARD interfaces. We target three different classes of implementers - database-technology familiar, database-content familiar, and database unfamiliar. By developing different middleware personalities that respond to the specific skills and interests of the audience, we have been able to keep our software simple and usable without sacrificing flexibility.

[1]  Aaron Marcus,et al.  Human communications issues in advanced UIs , 1993, CACM.

[2]  Pawan R. Vora Design/Methods & Tools: Designing for the Web: a survey , 1998, INTR.

[4]  Robert J. Robbins,et al.  Genome Informatics I: Community Databases , 1994, J. Comput. Biol..

[5]  David Konopnicki,et al.  W3QS: A Query System for the World-Wide Web , 1995, VLDB.

[6]  Cherri M. Pancake Improving quality through user-centered design , 1996, Quality of Numerical Software.

[7]  Cherri M. Pancake,et al.  Microbial Germplasm Database: Facilitating Access to Microbial Germplasm through Electronic Networks , 1997 .

[8]  Mark Ronald Newsome A browser-based tool for designing query interfaces to scientific databases , 1997 .

[9]  Cherri M. Pancake,et al.  HyperSQL: web-based query interfaces for biological databases , 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[10]  J. Lubchenco The Role of Science in Formulating a Biodiversity StrategyThere is concern about the discrepancy between the emerging scientific consensus and the policy currently in place , 1995 .

[11]  F. Davis Information Systems for Conservation Research, Policy, and PlanningBetter access to data for scientists, policy makers, and managers , 1995 .

[12]  Morten Kyng,et al.  Designing for cooperation: cooperating in design , 1991, CACM.

[13]  J. White Membrane fusion: the influenza paradigm. , 1995, Cold Spring Harbor symposia on quantitative biology.

[14]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Making customer-centered design work for teams , 1993, CACM.

[15]  Ronald M. Baecker,et al.  Readings in human-computer interaction : a multidisciplinary approach , 1988 .

[16]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Designing for error , 1987 .

[17]  Cherri M. Pancake Improving the Usability of Numerical Software through User-Centered Design , 1996 .

[18]  Rita R. Colwell Global Climate and Infectious Disease: The Cholera Paradigm* , 1996, Science.

[19]  David G. Novick,et al.  Participatory conversation in PD , 1993, CACM.

[20]  Cherri M. Pancake,et al.  Can Users Play an Effective Role in Parallel Tools Research? , 1997, Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl..