Kathrin Koebel

The result of our research so far is a functional prototype, implemented with Unity using the VRTK framework, optimized for the HTC Vive headset and controllers. Following the Visual Information Seeking Mantra it contains a map offering an overview of the full dataset, a body referenced on demand menu for filtering data points, and visualization concepts for direct integration of filter results in the map representation in the form of a Choropleth map encoding in combination with volume height adjustments. This immediate spatial representation of search results offers rapid insight on the contents of the dataset to the user. Thoughtful attention was given in respect to level of detail and visualization fidelity in the design and implementation of exemplary samples of collection objects. Applying the “details on demand” principle, a detail view with additional information is displayed by pointing at an item.

Because VR is still a rather new technology and there are not many established interaction patterns yet, it is important to continuously get user feedback during the development process and apply the learnings immediately to the next iteration of the prototype. This frequent lean feedback loop happens in informal test settings as opposed to periodical more formal user and usability testing procedure, which may include a variety of aspects such as comprehensibility, effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, learnability, retainability, ease of use, speed of performance, rate of errors and user comfort.

Jeremy Bailenson, founding director of Stanford University’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab, states in his recent publication that “VR is about exploration whereas storytelling is about control” [1]. Yet even while striving for offering the highest degree of freedom by handing full system control over to the user and allowing him/her to explore the virtual (data) space at is own discretion, the user needs some support for orientation, navigation and wayfinding to take advantage of this freedom, so that the exploration process may not solely be based on serendipity and the vastness of the data space doesn’t feel like a maze. .

In the previous article we explained the reasoning for some of the overall design decisions of our worldmap data exploration prototype. In this article aspects of consideration for the display of individual collection items such as the form of representation, their position on the map, the display of meta information and so forth are explained.

Because maps are something most users are familiar with and therefore offer a natural interface to access and explore the given data set, we chose to pursue this scenario for our initial prototype. In this article we give reason for the design decisions that were taken over the iterative implementation process of this prototype.

Interaction and UI design for virtual environments are still a rather novel discipline where not many standard design patterns have been established yet. This leaves much room for exploration and therefore present an interesting challenge. In this article we will look into theory and current research on this topic and investigate if proven principles from 2D interaction and UI design can be transferred to virtual space.

It is in the nature of cultural heritage data that datasets are often not complete or information is imprecise. We have briefly covered some of the challenges related to this issue in a previous blog post and will discuss this topic now more thoroughly.
In natural science the term “uncertainty” is used to describe doubt about the validity of the result of a measurement. This could be due to for example an error in measurement, transmission or conversion. In the context of cultural heritage uncertainty is rather referring to missing information or imprecision of data.

To visualize data means to form a mental model or image of something in order to gain insight. One particular way for doing this is by mapping, which is defined as “creating a graphic representations of information using spatial relationships within the graphic to represent some relationships within the data. The common and original practice of mapping is the scaled portrayal of geographical features, that is, cartography. In the contemporary sense of data visualization, it includes metaphorical extensions of geographical map conventions and literacies to other kinds of data, as well as innovative ways of visualizing data not clearly related to the geographical archetype. In popular vernacular, mapping can just mean organizing or systematizing information” [1]. Hans Ulrich Obrist further defines maps as “an abstraction of the physical or conceptual world – a symbolic depiction of a space or idea that allows one to understand and navigate an unfamiliar topography or complex topology. But while most conventional charts, plans and diagrams claim to offer an accurate, even objective picture of the world, each one is bound by the specific agendas of its creators and users” [2]. He points out that there is no neutral way for mapping data and stresses on the importance to carefully consider and choose factors such as visualisation methods, styles, type, medium and context when representing data because they influence how the data is perceived. Jay David Bolter writes in the context of medium and materiality that “the computer is not a neutral space for conveying information. It shapes the information it conveys and is shaped in turn by the physical and cultural worlds in which it functions” [3].

Working with museological and cultural heritage data evidently brings some challenges along as this kind of data differs in its nature from data of other fields. Here are some ideas and approaches of how to tackle them.
In order to allow any kind of automated data processing, structured data is required with unified scales of measurement. However many archives contain a mixture between quantitative and qualitative description of data, since information derived from expert knowledge is mostly qualitative in nature. To make use of textual descriptions, for example, requires to identify keywords and attribute them to an object in form of some kind of tags. Also for other scales of measurement harmonization might be needed.

Based on the insight and inspiration through the State of the Art research we developed some conceptual scenarios for our use case. These scenarios propose three different interface metaphors for possible solution approaches how the given archival dataset could be presented in the VR space and what forms of interaction would benefit the targeted user group. The overarching goal of all scenarios is to offer new perspectives and give more context to the data.