Coen Suurmond
email: csuurmond@rbk.nl

Information Systems and Sign Systems

Keywords: Organisational Semiotics, Sign Systems, Business Processes

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Semiotics is the study of sign processes. In organisational context it covers the study of the use and the production of signs in the execution of business processes. The information flows within an organisation are inextricably connected to the use of signs. Signs are the tangible or intangible carriers used for the transfer of information, and interpretation of signs generates meaning.

Within an organisation all kinds of different sign systems are used. In the development of information systems, we generally tend to be focused solely on one kind of sign system, namely the highly structured and formalised IT sign system. In analysis, modelling, requirements elicitation, specification, design and building we use partly formalised language in order to construct IT artefacts, rigid and formal computer based sign systems. Yet, in the daily routine of business processes, real people do not use only or even primarily formalised language. People interact through various kinds of social sign systems like natural language, specialised language (jargon), body language, pictorial information, and they use experience and background knowledge in their daily business routines. People interact on the basis of a combination of patterns, conventions, and norms. In the execution of their organisational tasks real people must deal with real world situations and with the expectations of other real people, using IT systems, natural language, sensory information, experience and background knowledge simultaneously in order to interpret the situation, take the correct actions, and inform people and automated processes in subsequent processes. Much organisational work is routine and can be automated. At the same time, automation itself is a human activity. Both automation projects and working with the results of automated operational processes are human activities and must necessarily be cov-ered by human responsibilities in the organisation. This implies that formal sign systems (computer systems) will always be embedded in social sign systems.

In the study of the use of information systems in organizational context, we should focus on the role of information in the business processes. The primary question should be: what information is needed in what form to carry out the tasks and responsibilities in business processes, where the tasks and responsibilities must necessarily include the production of information for subsequent processes. A similar focus on information rather than on technology is expressed by Ron Weber when he states that the core of the information systems discipline will lie in theories that account for information systems-related phenomena, and not in theories that account for information technology-related phenomena [START_REF] Weber | Still Desperately Seeking the IT Artefact[END_REF]. However, in much of ISR literature, and also in the statement on the IFIP website of the scope of TC8, the emphasis seems to be on the application of information technology [START_REF]IFIP TC8. TC 8 -Information Systems -Aims and Scopes[END_REF].

For the exchange of information between business processes different kinds of sign systems are involved, some formal, some informal. The different sign systems may complement each other, or they may overlap. One can distinguish between the mechanisms of the formal organisation (as specified in the official documents) and 'shadow' mechanisms (as evolved through the needs of the processes as perceived by the people involved). This leads to the following questions:

 Which different kinds of sign systems can be distinguished within an organisation, and what are their respective characteristics?  What are the implications of the differences between sign systems for system development? To find answers to these questions I will first discuss some basic insights from semiotics, and I will give tentative definitions of the concepts of sign system, formal sign system and social sign system. The paper will continue with a discussion of the economic criteria for the execution of business processes. The core of the paper is in the presentation and discussion of a typical business case and the role of formal and social sign systems in the case. To conclude, I will give provisional answers to the questions asked above, and I will indicate lines for further research.

Semiotics

Kecheng Liu writes in his work on organisational semiotics about the use of signs in organisations: "that all organised behaviour is effected through the communication and interpretation of signs by people, individually and in groups" [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]. According to a much used definition by Peirce "a sign, or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity" (2.228) [START_REF]Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce[END_REF]. Any individual percept can (must) be interpreted and as such function as a sign. In semiosis, humans are aware of the difference between the sign itself and that which is represented by the sign. This awareness is fundamental for semiosis, as Van Heusden has analysed in his work. He defines: "Semiosis is the relating, by someone, of a form and an icon" [START_REF] Van Heusden | Why Literature?[END_REF]. In this definition, the form represents the general, the convention, the stability and the continuity. This allows us to communicate with each other. The icon represents the specific situation, the individual perception. The awareness of the difference between form and icon is the driving force in the development of meaning. New words and new meanings of words are implicitly learned by ostension (pointing out typical examples) by use, and by generalising from individual instances of use to general conventional meaning [START_REF] Engelland | Ostension, Word Learning and the Embodied Mind[END_REF]. A specific case of the development of general (and binding) meaning by conscious assessment of individual cases against general meaning is the administration of justice. One example from the Dutch High Court: when the maximum amount of nitrate on lettuce is explicitly bound by law, does the same law apply to crinkly lettuce? Is crinkly lettuce a different vegetable, or is it just another kind of lettuce? [START_REF] Corstens | De Rechtsstaat moet je leren[END_REF] In the context of organisational semiotics, Van Heusden and Jorna have analysed how in organisations types of knowledge can be related to the use of signs. In sensory knowledge (the craftsman) the iconicity is predominant, in theoretically concrete knowledge standardised forms (codification) is predominant (classification schemes, conventional signs such as pictograms), and in theoretical knowledge (structures) the relation between abstract forms is predominant [START_REF] Van Heusden | Toward a Semiotic Theory of Cognitive Dynamics in Organisations[END_REF]. Their semiotic space, an adaptation of the information space of Boisot [START_REF] Boisot | Information Space[END_REF], has thus three axes: degree of sensory detail (global/detailed), degree of codification (weak/strong), and degree of theoretical abstraction (concrete/abstract). The semiotic space indicates the kind of knowledge that is predominant in a specific business process as the relative weight of the three dimensions. In each and every case, however, all three dimensions are present. Pure iconicity cannot be communicated (works of art come close), pure theory would be unconnected to concrete events (mathematics and logic come close). In our social world we deal mostly with signs in the context of more or less comprehensive sign systems. Natural language is an example (utterances stand for meaning and intentions), it is the sign system in which our culture as a whole is embedded. Morse code is another example, and is a dedicated sign system designed for a specific purpose, both in a narrow sense (the coding of letters in dots and bars) and in a broad sense (the conventions that regulate the communication by means of Morse code). The nautical system of flag signals is another example of a sign system. To elaborate a little on the last examples (and in agreement with the general system theory that says that any coherent set of elements and relations can be considered a system): the system of flag signals, the system of colours and forms of buoys, the convention of nautical radio communication, the use of symbols on water charts can each be considered as separate sign systems, or the sum of all conventions regarding nautical communication together can be considered as a single sign system. Each part of the nautical sign system is governed by explicitly stated rules and conventions, the nautical sign system as a whole is both governed by the underlying rules and conventions, and will probably also show emerging social habits and patterns that are characteristic for certain places or for certain types of sea traffic. In natural language a lot of different sign systems could be differentiated, and it would be difficult to find good demarcations between them. Lotman has coined the term "semiosphere" for the grand total of all the different and overlapping sign systems that make up the environment a human being lives in [START_REF] Lotman | Universe of the Mind[END_REF]. It is certainly not my ambition in this paper to develop a method for distinguishing all kinds of possible sign systems in human communication. For this paper it suffices to make the essential distinction between formal sign systems (especially as used in computer systems) and social sign systems (as used in human communication). I will start with some tentative definitions of sign system, formal sign system, and social sign system.

A sign system is a set of signs, used by a social group in a social context, together with for that group in that context settled practices regarding the application and interpretation of the signs and combinations of signs.

A formal sign system is a sign system where the set of signs and the set of rules governing well-formed formulas as valid combinations of signs are formally defined. A good example of a definition of such a system is the proposal for an International Algebraic Language (IAL, precursor of Algol-60) by Backus in his paper at the ACM-Conference in Zürich in 1959 [START_REF] Backus | The Syntax and Semantics of the Proposed International Algebraic Language[END_REF]. Backus writes in this paper:

"(1) There must exist a precise description of those sequences of symbols which constitute legal IAL programs. Otherwise it will often be the case that a program which is legal and translatable for one translating program will not be so with respect to another.

(2) For every program there must be a precise description of its "meaning", the process or transformation which it describes. Otherwise the machine language programs obtained by two translating programs from a single IAL program may behave differently in one or more crucial respects." What is stated here, is that given the formal and deterministic nature of translator programs (translating source code into machine code), the rules for the source code must be fully specified. If not, writers of translator programs may make different choices, resulting in different behaviour for the same source code.

A social sign system is a sign system where the set of signs and the set of habits governing the application and interpretation of signs are formed by social practices, varying from explicit stated rules via social conventions to evolving patterns). In law, we find explicitly stated rules. In the application of law (police, court) we recognise the normative force of social conventions and social patterns. For example, what counts as "self-defence" is dependent on the societal context and of the interpretation of the actual situation and the societal context. In the case of Oscar Pistorius in South Africa the judge had to decide whether to interpret Pistorius' killing of his girlfriend as an act of mistaken self-defence, as an act of manslaughter, or an act of murder.

Meaning and Sign Systems

Meaning can only be found in the use of social sign systems. A formal sign system by itself is devoid of meaning, although there is often the suggestion that it does have meaning. Backus writes "meaning" between quotation marks when discussing automatic processing or transforming, to indicate there is no real meaning involved here (my interpretation). I will give an example from daily practice of the meaninglessness of formal sign systems. Some time ago I needed a new bank card because the old card was pretty damaged. It was still functioning, but it would be broken soon. In order to request a new card via the website of the bank I had to log in first. For this action I needed to use my damaged but functioning card. The request form for the new card asked for the reason (an obligatory choice) for requesting a new bank card: (A) my card is broken; (B) my card was lost; (C) my card was stolen. My reason did not appear in the options. How to answer the question? My line of thought was: if I choose either "lost" or "stolen", I will probably get a new PIN code. If I choose "broken", I will retain my PIN code. Therefore, I chose "broken". Then, I finished the other questions on the form and concluded my dialogue with the website by again using my damaged card and entering the security code connected to that card. The final message of the website was: "You requested a new bank card because your current card does not function any more. The new card will be available after three working days". So, I had to use my damaged card twice to tell the system the self-same card did not function any more. I was quite happy this formal sign system did not have meaning! This example shows three different domains of interpretation: (1) natural language as used and interpreted in human communication, here used for the description of the case; (2) the formal operations within the ICT system according to the formally declared variables, their values, and the conditions as specified in the program code; and

(3) natural language in the presentation layer of the software. The last domain suggests the use of meaningful terms by the computer, but is nothing more than an alias for some formal variable or value on a variable.

Economic Norms

Information systems are resources for business processes, and just like any other kind of resource organisational and economic norms apply for their effective and efficient deployment. Information systems include all kinds of organised exchange of information, both computer based and based on numerous other forms of exchange of information by face to face meeting, email, reporting, and so on. Norms of effectiveness and efficiency are generic economic criteria and are always relevant. These norms apply for the use of sign systems in business processes like they apply for the use of every kind of resource. Sign systems fulfil a role in the transfer of information within and between internal business processes, as well as in the interaction and transfer of information between the organisation and its customers, suppliers, and any other external stakeholder. Sign system A is better suited than sign system B for a certain task if A consumes less resources than B. Like many other economic issues the generic criterion is straightforward and clear. However, practice is more often than not complex and not straightforward: (1) the criteria for the successful execution of the task are multi-dimensional, (2) the term resources encloses a heterogeneous group of very different kinds of resources, (3) the determination of the price per unit consumed for a resource can be a highly complex and challenging issue, and (4) the attribution of the amount of resources to specific tasks is often difficult. All these consideration do not take away the fundamental insight that the issues of effectiveness and efficiency always apply in an organisational context. Sometimes effectivity will prevail, sometimes efficiency, but it is always an essential consideration in an organisational context. Apart from the generic criteria mentioned above specific norms for the particular organisation will apply. Partly, these norms derive from the position of the organisation in its environment (for a company: primarily market relations, in combination with relations with other external stakeholders), and partly the norms derive from the internal organisation (Mintzberg: the way of splitting up the tasks and the supplementary mechanisms for coordination of the tasks) [START_REF] Mintzberg | The Structuring of Organizations[END_REF]. In the context of this paper for the market relationship (both as seller and as buyer) the difference between classical contracts and relational contracts is very important [START_REF]The Relational Theory of Contract, Selected Works of Ian MacNeil[END_REF]. Classical contracts are explicit and based on standard terms. These kind of contracts are therefore suited for elementary stand-alone economic transactions between anonymous trading partners, such as can be found on spot markets (buying a paper at the news stand or buying a shipload of crude oil). Relational contracts are not fully specified and are based on a longer lasting trusting relationship between the trading partners. In traditional economic theory, the model of the classical contract prevails with its notion of the individualistic and selfish behaviour of economic actors. In real economic relationships, elements of relational contracts are usually present. The relational aspect of economic relationships of the company with its customers and suppliers is the basis for some of the company's operational norms in business processes. In executing its processes the implicit rules of the economic relationship with the customer must be obeyed (and rules apply for the behaviour of the customer towards the company also). For those who are familiar with the Demo method: in Demo literature the examples are typically examples of transactions in classical contracts, and give therefore a distorted view of business practices [START_REF] Dietz | Enterprise Ontology[END_REF].

Case Study

The following example shows what the considerations are in choosing the right sign system. Suppose a customer has a long standing relationship with his supplier / producer, and the customer asks: "Could you deliver about 3000 kg trimming in the second half of next week, not too fat". The supplier answers: "I will take care of it!". What kind agreement do we have here, as expressed in loose natural language? And how will this agreement be translated into the computer systems of the supplier / producer, from order entry, through production and shipping to delivery and invoicing? Producer / Supplier 1 Suppose the supplier / producer has a simple and small-scale computer system for sales & invoicing. The internal processes are not supported by this system. In this situation the order will be put into the sales-system with customer-number, delivery date either Thursday or Friday (more or less arbitrarily), the quantity ordered is 3000kg, and the item-number for the product with the description "trimmings 80/20" (trimmings with 80% meat and 20% fat), price. If it is a regular order from a regular customer, this information will suffice. If this order is in some respect an exception to the regular habits and patterns, some notes will be made to remind the colleagues in production and shipment department what is to be known about this particular order. These notes might be made into the computer system (if some comment fields for free text are available), or in the sales-agenda of the sales-person, or on some paper. When later on the order is prepared, and it is a regular order from a regular customer, then the information Customer C, Product P, Delivery D, Amount A will be sufficient for the production department to select or produce the trimmings that will satisfy this customer order. Just the variable parameters of the order are communicated to the shop floor. All further information to fulfil this order is known by the employees on the shop floor, including the slack permitted in the product specifications, the delivery date and the amount to be delivered (routine is presupposed). In other words: to know the customer and the product ordered is sufficient for the execution of the order on the work floor, all to specifications and expectations. Part of the established habits of this particular customersupplier relationship might be that the supplier informs the customer on Tuesday or Wednesday what will probably be delivered, and when. Or the customer informs the supplier that due to unforeseen demand he has a shortage, so please deliver at the earliest possible moment. Producer / Supplier 2 Suppose, by contrast, a supplier / producer who has a highly integrated ERP system. Here also the first step is order entry with the customer-number, product-number, delivery date, quantity, price. The differences are in the subsequent processes. The order data are processed in production planning, as a result production orders will be generated to have exactly the ordered quantity of the ordered product available at the shipping date. Next, production will execute the production orders. The shop floor control module of the ERP system will be monitoring the progress and results of the production processes. Deviations from the production planning are detected and result in corrective actions. If the output from production is less than planned, production will be replanned to produce the lacking quantity. If the output from production is more than planned, the extra output will be added to stock. Is demand for that product-number more than what is available, for example because of late orders from other customers, replanning (or buying) must provide the lacking quantity. All the actions indicated above can be executed automatically in the ERP system.

Analysis of the Sign Systems in the Business Case

In the examples above we see two different sign systems at work. The first supplier / producer uses a natural language sign system with apparently vague descriptive terms and very loosely formulated and imprecise specifications. The trade partners have a stable relationship and each of the trade partners in this economic relation understands the product, the market, and the partner. In this situation, the margins of the trade are sufficiently clear, the trade partners grant each other some latitude in the interpretation of the agreement, and as a result both the internal and external transaction costs are kept at a minimum level. It is a typical example of a relational contract.

For the financial aspects some very specific formal obligations apply. Financial transactions must be factual, consistent and transparent for external stakeholders (In-land Revenue, chartered accountants). Therefore, each invoice must have a unique number (with checks on completeness), and each invoice will show the VAT number of seller and buyer, and each invoice must declare the delivered goods (description and quantity). These formal requirements are met in the sales / invoicing system, partly automatically generated (unique successive invoice-number), partly configuration (VAT-rate, own VAT number), partly master data (VAT-number customer, address data of the customer, description of the product), and partly from order / delivery data (product-number, price, possibly discount, quantity delivered).

The second supplier / producer uses a formal sign system which operates by unique ID's for customers, address data, sales items and all other entities involved in the processing of information. The of Material specifies precisely which resources in which quantities are required to produce one unit of a sales unit, sometimes in combination with a specification of setup times for production, sometime with a specification of setup times dependent on the preceding product on the production line. The ordering process (commerce), the production planning process (coordination), and the production and distribution processes (material handling) are (dis)connected by the ERP system At the beginning of the trade process, at order entry, there is no difference between the two suppliers / producers. Basically, they record the same information in the same way. At the end of the trade process, after establishing the delivery data, the subsequent processes of preparing the delivery documents (either on paper or electronically), and invoicing are the same. The latter processes are bound by financial rules and commercial law. But in between, in all processes involved in order fulfilment, important differences can be found. In the case of the first supplier / producer, the order entry data are made available for the internal processes, and all interpretation is done by knowledgeable employees. In the case of the second supplier, the order entry data of this particular order is automatically processed together with a bunch of other customer orders. Formally derived information is made available for specific processes. The two essential differences between the cases are: (1) the kind of interpretation / processing of information, and (2) the kind of information that is available at different points in the order fulfilment processes. Both differences have a strong connection with the predominant sign system used for the internal processes in the organisation: a social sign system in the first case (common natural language, professional language, organisational terminology), formal sign systems in the second case (computer systems).

Sign Systems and Business Processes

From the example case it will be clear that formal and social sign systems differ in their characteristics to a considerable extent. A general problem in developing computer based information systems is a lack of awareness of these differences. Taken collectively, the user community tends to neglect the differences and ascribe meaning and a capacity of understanding to machines and automata, while the system developer community tends to neglect the differences and blame users for not making clear what they are doing and what they want. Under the hypothetical assumption that in a concrete project both user community and developer community (1) are well aware of the differences between formal sign systems and social sign systems, and (2) are well aware of the double embeddedness of formal sign systems in social sign systems (both in the development of formal sign systems and in the operational application of formal sign systems), the question is what the practical implications are of the differences in the development of an information system.

The same economic norms apply for information systems as for all other kind of resources; the information systems should be effective and efficient. Towards external stakeholders, effectiveness means satisfying their justified requirements and expectations (the expectations being an essential component of relational contracts). For the internal business processes, the effectiveness of the information systems means satisfying the maxims of Grice for a conversation: give all relevant information for the task at hand, avoid all irrelevant information, be accurate, brief, clear and orderly [START_REF] Grice | Studies in the Way of Words[END_REF]. To meet these Gricean maxims, some information is best provided by computer systems, and some by human communication. Situational factors like the kinds of relationship with the outside world and the internal company's culture are codetermining for what the best mix between formal and social sign systems would be.

John Kay writes: "The firm is defined by its contracts and relationships. Added value is created by its success in putting these contracts and relationships together, so it is the quality and distinctiveness of these contracts that promote added value" [START_REF] Kay | Foundations of Corporate Success[END_REF]. To sustain the distinctive capabilities of a company with relational contracts, social sign systems matter most.

Also important is the human accountability for actions in an organisational context. Tasks and decisions may be delegated to computer systems, but people are responsible for the execution of the automated tasks. Firstly, this implies that in the configuring of a computer system the responsible people in the organisation must determine the categorisations and the business rules, and must be able to observe and approve the behaviour of the system before operational application of the system. This makes high demands on the translation of the organisational practices into formalised models, and vice versa. Secondly, in operational use people must be able to translate their operational situation into meaningful categories in the computer system (N.B.: this means meaningful for the employee!). Thirdly, in operational use people must be able to translate output of the computer into meaningful information for their task at hand.

Conclusions

In the sections above the fundamental differences between social sign systems and formal sign systems were discussed and illustrated with some business examples. When practitioners in both the user community and the developer community are more aware of these differences, much would be gained already. Subsequent research is necessary to further conceptualise sign systems and its properties, and to analyse business processes in relation to the properties of sign systems. Apart from the essential distinction between social sign systems and formal sign systems, many subtypes in both social and formal sign systems can be differentiated. However, there is the risk of uncontrolled proliferation in such differentiation when a clear goal is lacking. In Information Systems Research, the goal would be to gain a better understanding of the fit of computer based information systems to the business processes. In this perspective, both social sign systems, formal sign systems and business processes should be analysed and categorised in relation to each other. Several kinds of problems are to be solved: [START_REF] Weber | Still Desperately Seeking the IT Artefact[END_REF] the practical problem of the translation of information between formal sign systems and social sign systems; (2) the practical problem of the translation of information between different formal sign systems (in a heterogeneous landscape of different computer systems, also EDI issues); (3) the practical problem of translation between different social sign systems (a classical organisational issue); and last but not least (4) the fitness of a specific sign system for specific business processes. To conclude, insight in the nature and characteristics of different kinds of sign systems is highly relevant for information system development, and will gain both economic results (effectiveness and efficiency, competitiveness) and organisational results (better definition of tasks, less erosion of responsibilities).


Samuel B Buchdid
email: buchdid@ic.unicamp.br

Heiko H Hornung

Roberto Pereira
email: rpereira@ic.unicamp.br

M C Baranauskas

M Cecília
email: cecilia@ic.unicamp.br

C Baranauskas

Clarifying the Situational Context of a TV Company towards the Design of iDTV Applications

Keywords: Organizational Semiotics, Semantic and Norm Analysis, Design Process, Interactive Digital TV, iDTV applications

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Terrestrial TV has undergone transformations since its establishment. The first images were in black and white, with poor image and audio quality at the receiving end. Sometime after, analog TV won a new attraction: colors. Color TV was a dream of consumption for most viewers and boosted the reach of TV on society. The last major milestone has occurred with the arrival of Digital TV (DTV). DTV includes transmission and compression of digital signals, receiver processing capability and interactivity, thereby enabling Interactive Digital TV (iDTV) [START_REF] Gawlinski | Interactive Television Production[END_REF]. During this migration process, broadcasters have to adapt constantly in order to both meet the technical needs and please an ever more demanding audience. Hence, the TV companies need to improve their production chain with new methods to produce their programming. Such investments require new business models that justify these changes and bring benefits to broadcasters as well as to the audience. In this sense, the investments on DTV and iDTV should be understood as an opportunity to explore the development of new applications, reorganization of television production chains, generating business and social transformations [START_REF] Fernandes | Introdução à Televisão Digital Interativa: Arquitetura, Protocolos, Padrões e Práticas[END_REF].In fact, TV is a highly social and pervasive technologycharacteristics that make it a challenging and interesting field for investments. With the arrival of DTV, a new business model emerged, and later iDTV opened up a variety of possibilities for new services for TV [START_REF] Rice | Designing new interfaces for digital interactive television usable by older adults[END_REF]. Cesar et al. [START_REF] Cesar | Social Television and User Interaction[END_REF] also draw attention to TV's potential social impact, and suggest research on iDTV that incorporates characteristics of viewers and everyday lives. For Kunert [START_REF] Kunert | User-Centered Interaction Design Patterns for Interactive Digital Television Applications[END_REF], beyond better quality in audio and video, viewers can actually interact with the TV, creating a close communication channel between the viewer and the TV companies. Moreover, in order to bring viewers to TV, Pedrosa et al. [START_REF] Pedrosa | A multimodal interaction component for digital television[END_REF] consider the use of smartphones and tablets in the interaction with TV.

However, the design of interactive applications could be considered a new component into TV companies' production chains. While on the one hand, TV companies still do not have a culture of developing software systems, on the other hand, the software industry has no experience in producing TV programs. Thus, there is a need for creating a specific process for developing iDTV applications that considers both the particularities of television production and the foundations of software development processes [START_REF] Veiga | Modelo de Processo de Desenvolvimento de Programas para TV Digital e Interativa[END_REF]. When the need to design a new technology for a company arises, it seems necessary to understand the context into which the system will be inserted, and the main forces that act on it directly and indirectly. Understanding the forces that govern organizational contexts and identifying ontological relations and norms is necessary for the system to make sense to the company and its various sectors [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF].

In this paper, we draw on the knowledge produced through workshops conducted in the practical context of a Brazilian TV company that is about to create its first iDTV application. The workshops were conducted in order to clarify forces that emerge within the practical context of this TV company towards the design of iDTV applications. The workshops were organized and conducted on the grounds of the Socially Aware Computing [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social Awareness in HCI[END_REF] approach to design, Organizational Semiotics [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF][START_REF] Stamper | Information in Business and Administrative Systems[END_REF] and Participatory Design [START_REF]Participatory design: Principles and practices[END_REF]. We discuss the main findings revealed from the study of Ontological Charts that were created from these situated workshops, and are grounded on Semantic Analysis Method (SAM) and the Norm Analysis Method (NAM). Our goal is to explorer how these methods can help us to understand the organizational context and also to anticipate organizational changes that might have an impact on future investments into the production chain and on the TV company's way of doing business.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the theories and methods that ground our work; Section 3 describes the practices conducted to support a situated and participatory design of iDTV applications; Section 4 presents the Semantic and Norm Analysis to clarify the situational context before and after the introduction of iDTV applications in the TV company production chain, and presents and discusses the main findings. Section 5 presents our final considerations and directions for future research.

Organizational Semiotics (OS) understands organizations of people as complex systems of sign processing, and recognizes that a technical system is only part of a wider complex system in which people behave according to an organized system of norms. For this, OS proposes a comprehensive study of organizations on different levels (informal, formal and technical), and their interdependencies. According to Liu [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF], organizations themselves are information systems, and the organizational functions in these different levels are essential for designing a technical information system for this organization. In the informal level, an organization is composed of social norms that drive people's behavior, perceptions, beliefs, values, customs, habits, culture, etc. In the formal level, an organization has their own rules and bureaucratic procedures to do mechanistic and repetitive tasks. The technical system is a part of the formal level which can be automated. In order to facilitate a better understanding, development, management and use of information systems, a set of methods known as MEASUR (Methods for Eliciting, Analyzing and Specifying User's Requirements) was developed in OS [START_REF] Stamper | Information in Business and Administrative Systems[END_REF]. In this paper, two of these methods inspired our analysis: Semantic Analysis Method and Norm Analysis Method. The understanding of the design problem in the situated context was supported by practices of Socially Aware Computing [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social Awareness in HCI[END_REF]. Semantic Analysis Method (SAM) is a method to understand the nature and role of affordances (invariant patterns of behavior) and agents (affordances that can take responsibility both for their own and other affordances) in business systems. A business system could be considered a real information system, which is infinitely complex, and only a part of it can be modeled: just a realization (or an instance) of patterns agents' behavior. In practice, SAM focuses on the responsible agents and their repertoires of behavior. For this, the ontology chart maps the temporal relationships between the agent and affordances [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]. Norm Analysis Method (NAM) is a means to specify the temporal patterns of behavior (the social, cultural and organizational norms) governing the agents' actions in the business domain. Norms are linked to each part of the semantic model as the conditions and restrictions for the accomplishment of affordances. A norm can define responsibility for an agent occupying a certain role inside an organizational context and can specify conditions in which some agent can perform some action inside it. Norms have valid periods of existence and can be further specified in a structured way for being translated into a computable language [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]. Socially Aware Computing (SAC) [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social Awareness in HCI[END_REF] is a socially responsible, participatory and universal approach to the design of systems. SAC draws on OS [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF][START_REF] Stamper | Information in Business and Administrative Systems[END_REF] to understand the context in which the technical system will be inserted and the main forces that directly or indirectly act on it; and on Participatory Design (PD) [START_REF]Participatory design: Principles and practices[END_REF] to involve heterogeneous groups of people, who may influence and/or may be influenced by the problem being discussed, and to understand the situated context. SAC understands the design of a system as incremental cycles that start from society and cross the informal and formal layers to produce a technical solution for an organization. The movement returns crossing the formal and informal layers alike, and impacting on the society; new incremental cycles may be necessary for the technical system to fit the needs of the organization.

The study scenario is EPTV: a Brazilian broadcasting company whose program reaches a region in Brazil that includes 300 cities and more than 10 million citizens [START_REF]EPTV news portal[END_REF]. Four participatory workshops were conducted in the situated context of EPTV aiming at the design of an iDTV application for the TV program "Terra da Gente" (TdG; "Our Land" in English; [START_REF]Terra da Gente Portal[END_REF]). Ten participants directly and indirectly involved in the problem domain (e.g., designer, engineers, researchers, TV program director and interns) participated in these workshops. The workshops were grounded on the SAC approach [START_REF] Baranauskas | Social Awareness in HCI[END_REF], which was instantiated for the situated context of EPTV (cf. Fig. 1). In this context, we used artifacts from and inspired by OS, such as the Stakeholders Identification Diagram [START_REF] Liu | Employing MEASUR Methods for Business Process Reengineering in China[END_REF], the Evaluation Frame [START_REF] Baranauskas | Guiding the Process of Requirements Elicitation with a Semiotic Approach[END_REF], and the Semiotic Ladder [START_REF] Stamper | Information in Business and Administrative Systems[END_REF], and created new practices for supporting participatory and situated design activities. The activities encompassed (see Fig. 1): A) the problem understanding, the proposal of solutions, and the analysis and organization of requirements for the application to be designed; B) Prototyping activities through an adapted version of the Brain Draw participatory technique; C) The materialization of the final prototype; D) Evaluations by representatives from the target audience, by Human-Computer Interaction specialists, and also in a participatory practice with the workshop participants. These activities contributed to the problem clarification, as well as to the design and evaluation of a prototype for an iDTV application. The interested reader may consult [START_REF] Buchdid | Creating an iDTV Application from Inside a TV Company: a Situated and Participatory Approach[END_REF], [START_REF] Buchdid | Playing Cards and Drawing with Patterns: Situated and Participatory Practices for Designing iDTV Applications[END_REF] and [START_REF] Buchdid | You Can Interact With Your TV and You May Like It: an Investigation on Persuasive Aspects for an iDTV Application[END_REF] for detailed results and discussions related to these activities. In this paper, we use information raised from the discussions during these workshops with the EPTV team in order to illustrate the company's organizational structure behind the TdG TV program. The intention is to show how the company is currently organized and uses efforts of several teams that influence and suffer influences from the TdG program to create a first iDTV application. Moreover, we wanted to prospect, according to the participants' perspectives, which organizational changes in the company might arise from the introduction of an iDTV application in the TdG production chain. The following text is a description of the EPTV company based on the shared knowledge constructed during the workshops with the EPTV team.

EPTV is an affiliate of a large Brazilian broadcasting company. Currently, EPTV has several teams who work in different sectors that cover the management, production, marketing and transmission of the TV company. EPTV consists of a group with four main stations, and with the support of several rebroadcasting stations, it can cover all its audience with digital and analog programming. EPTV, as well as other affiliates, produces several regional programs (journalism and documentaries) that complement the national programming provided by the parent company, and reaching the local audience and providing marketing opportunities to advertisers and sponsors in the region. EPTV competes with other TV companies in order to attract the audience.

TdG is one of several programs produced by EPTV. TdG's production team works with a cohesive team of editors, writers, producers, designers, technicians and journalists, among other staff members. In addition to the television program, the TdG team also produces a printed magazine and maintains a web portal. Both the magazine and the web portal serve as complementary sources of material for the TdG audience and support TV programs from the parent company. Each member has well-defined rules inside the TdG team. For instance, the Chief Editor is the person who coordinates the production team (e.g., editors, journalists, designers, etc.) of the television program, web portal and magazine. The graphic designer is responsible for the graphic art of the television program and the web portal, and will be responsible for the graphic art of the iDTV application. TdG's team might also be engaged with financial issues such as making feasible the TV show's production costs and minimizing risks raising funding for the program as advertisers and sponsors.

After the program is produced, TdG has the support from the engineering team to transmit the program to its audience. The engineering team is responsible for technical aspects of transmission of several TV programs produced by EPTV, and also for the retransmission of television content that comes from the parent company. Engineering is also responsible for providing technical support (e.g., links between TV companies, TV programs produced for other affiliates) to distribute content among regional branches of EPTV, the parent company and other affiliates. Finally, engineering is responsible for entering data related to the local program, such as electronic programming guide (EPG), software updates and closed caption that complements the TV's schedule and are broadcasted together. The engineering team must also follow the DTV standards because the TV signal must run on several television receivers from different manufacturers. Any improper use might result in the TV signal not running properly or even blocking the receiver.

EPTV works with other relevant teams, e.g., for managing the organization and for hiring staff, but those are out of the scope of this paper. Figure 2 shows the ontology chart created for the EPTV company representing the TdG TV show as the focal problem.

When an iDTV application is introduced into a TV production chain, a development team is required in the TV company to develop the application in accordance with the programming languages defined by the Brazilian DTV standard (ISDB-Tb). For the application to use the interactive channel from connectivity companies, it is also necessary that this new team offers technical support for connectivity problems and management of data received from viewers. This team could be introduced inside EPTV as a separate department, as part of the production team or as part of engineering team. Moreover, it might be an external software company developing services for the TV company. Workshop participants suggested that the iDTV design team could be included into the production team but receiving support from engineering. The engineering team also should propose novel technologies that can be incorporated into the TV company's production and transmission chain generating a relative market advantage. For instance, in the case of an iDTV application, engineering should evaluate solutions (e.g., programing language to be used, how to design the application, how to broadcast it) suitable to the organization's necessities. For engineering, the development of an iDTV application should require resources for purchasing multiplexing and broadcasting equipment to transmit the application with the TV show content. Furthermore, engineering should allocate human resources to operate such transmission equipment and adjust transmission according to the norms from the parent company, e.g., technical norms. The engineering team must also adjust bandwidth for the application transmission, making sure it will not overload the total bandwidth available for the transmission of television content, which includes video, audio and other data types. The period in which the application should be transmitted should also be adjusted according to the duration of the TV show. Thus, the application and its transmission should be of easy operation. Once implanted, these activities may be automated to require less effort from the engineering team.

The production team should consider that the insertion of an iDTV application might increase the TV show audience by people who like new technologies and innovations. Thus, the production team should conduct a careful analysis of the existing and potential future audience. If the iDTV application does not gain public acceptance, then it must be reformulated and not be transmitted together with the TV show. The produc- tion team must also produce the informational content of the iDTV application since it complements the current TV show. Similarly, a designer from the TV show should produce the visual iDTV application layout so that the application has the same visual identity as the TV show. The rationale to guarantee consistency between the TV show and the application is to promote integration, i.e. by stimulating viewers to access additional information about the show or answering quizzes about the show's content.

The design of iDTV applications involves the allocation of additional resources (e.g., people and money), and this kind of application can introduce risks for the TV company since it is not yet fully consolidated in the market and does not have the full acceptance from viewers yet. Thus, the production team should analyze the viability to produce iDTV applications according to resources from the TV company.

On the one hand, EPTV understands that producing iDTV applications is a necessity from the market because other affiliates and competitors provide this type of application in their schedules. On the other hand, some sponsors and advertisers might not want this type of application because it can distract viewers, reducing their attention to their ads. Finally, as the television content is dynamic, the application development process and the produced application should be easily customizable. New norms (previously cited, and shown in Table 1) that impact on these ontological relations emerged (see Fig. 3). These norms should be analyzed by teams to identify the feasibility to produce the iDTV application. To make the dynamic part of the informational system explicit, the rules of behavior used in this paper are structured according to the behavioral norms format [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF] "WHENEVER <condition> IF <state> THEN <agent> IS <deontic operator> TO <action>". Table 1 shows some of these norms: the first column contains an identification number to reference the norms in Figure 3.

Table 1. Some norms for EPTV after insertion of the design of an iDTV application.

Concern Explanation 1

Whenever "an iDTV application needs to be transmitted" if "it is associated with a TV Show" then "the engineering team" is "obliged" to "adjust bandwidth and transmission time according to the duration of the TV Show"

2

Whenever "an iDTV application needs to be transmitted" if "it cannot spend a lot of resources" then "the engineering department" is "permitted" to "facilitate or automate the transmission operation" 3

Whenever "an iDTV application is designed" if "it addresses a diverse target audience" then "the production team" is "obliged" to "carefully analyze the audience"

4

Whenever "an iDTV application is designed" if "it doesn't have public acceptance" then "the production team" is "permitted" to "reformulate it or do not broadcast it together with the TV show"

Whenever "an iDTV application is designed" if "there are high risks for the TV company" then "the production team" is "obliged" to "analyze the risks to design iDTV applications"

Whenever "an iDTV application is designed" if "distract the audience in viewing ads" then "EPTV" is "permitted" to " customize the iDTV application to prevent that this happens"

7

Whenever "an iDTV application is designed for TdG" if "it must be updated weekly according to the current TV show content" then "the production team" is "permitted" to "develop easy to use mechanisms for customizing the iDTV application"

Synthesis of the Discussion

EPTV workshops helped to understand in practice that to produce iDTV applications, the production chain requires efforts of several teams from the current broadcaster's production chain. Actually, an iDTV application in a TV show changes the model of developing TV content, and teams are not fully prepared to deal with the changes adequately. In addition, the passive viewer becomes an active user with the arrival of iDTV and should be examined more cautiously. Leaving this responsibility to software companies may not be suitable because of the difference between the TV show and the application domains. Finally, market uncertainties and the viewer's acceptance make it even more difficult to invest in resources for producing iDTV applications. Knowing the TV Company's situated context was a first step to understand these challenges and to propose a design process for iDTV applications that make sense for its different stakeholders, including the final audience.

The ontology and norms analysis performed to map out the organizational structure before and after the insertion of an iDTV application showed substantial changes in the organizational structure of the TV company. New organizational affordances, agents, norms and ontological relations emerged. It also was possible to point out what and where these changes occurred, giving an indication of how they should be taken into account in the adaptation process for inserting the iDTV applications in the TV production chain.

The ontology relations and norms were used in this paper to understand the situated context from a TV company, and some terms (e.g., EPTV and TdG) appear as realizations or instances of "universals" (a kind of a concept) and "particulars" (a concept).

Although different from the proposed in the formal literature [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF], these representations were useful to highlight organizational changes from a focal problem within the situated context of a company.

Even though the norms and ontology analysis came from knowledge of the situated workshops, many of the findings pointed out by the analysis may inform other organizations with different organizational structures.

Conclusions

The development of a TV show can be seen as efforts of skilled individuals working in teams. Each element has an important role in the development phases of the program [START_REF] Bonasio | Televisão Manual de Produção & Direção[END_REF].

In this paper, we analyzed in a situated context what impacts the insertion of an iDTV application might trigger in a TV company production chain. The findings indicate challenges that a TV company must face to restructure its internal production chain in order to support iDTV applications. In this sense, this study might be helpful to anticipate the impact that an innovation (e.g., a new model of the production process) can cause within the organizational system of the TV company. Furthermore, show the knowledge that emerges from an organizational analysis in situated context opens opportunities for future studies in the iDTV field, whether they either theoretical or fundamentally practical.

As future work, we intend to develop a design process for iDTV applications that considers the needs of different teams that compose the TV company in order to propose a process that fits the reality of the TV company, and which also takes into account the needs of a diverse target audience.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Situated instance of SAC's meta-model for design

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Ontology Chart of EPTV representing the TdG TV show as the focal problem

Figure 3

 3 Figure 3 shows the diagram with the partial Ontology Chart after inserting the design of an iDTV application within the chain of production for the TdG TV show at EPTV. The Ontology Chart is instantiated in the focal problem related to the production of the TdG TV show and the design of an iDTV application for it.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Ontology Chart of EPTV after insertion of the design of an application iDTV

Acknowledgments. This research is partially funded by CAPES, CNPq (#165430/2013-3) and FAPESP (2013/02821-1; 2014/01382-7). The authors thank EPTV who collaborated and authorized the use of the documentation in this project.


Vanessa L Maike

Samuel B Buchdid
email: buchdid@ic.unicamp.br

M C Baranauskas

Vanessa R M L Maike

M Cecília
email: cecilia@ic.unicamp.br

C Baranauskas

Designing Natural User Interfaces Scenarios for All and for Some: An Analysis Informed by Organizational Semiotics Artifacts

Keywords: Human-Computer Interaction, HCI, NUIs, Accessibility

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Known as Natural User Interfaces (NUIs), this interface paradigm in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) encompasses devices and technologies that, as the term "natural" implies, only require users to do what comes naturally to them, instead of having to develop technical skills to be able to interact with the interface. This, as [START_REF] O'hara | On the Naturalness of Touchless : Putting the " Interaction " Back into NUI[END_REF] argue, can both attract users who do not feel comfortable with the traditional mouse and keyboard interfaces, and elicit new design and engineering challenges that will inspire research in several different knowledge areas. However, to become actual usable products, these ideas need to consider, from the very beginning, the context in which the new technology will be used and who its potential stakeholders are. Organizational Semiotics (OS) provides tools with the potential for this analysis of organization and context, but given the novelty of NUIs there is the additional challenge derived from considerations of Accessibility and users with disabilities. Although there are some initiatives in this direction, be it in the form of general NUI guidelines [START_REF] Wigdor | Brave NUI World: Designing Natural User Interfaces for Touch and Gesture[END_REF] or in the form of design and evaluation heuristics for NUIs [START_REF] Maike | Seeing through the Kinect: A Survey on Heuristics for Building Natural User Interfaces Environments[END_REF], creating new tech-nologies with NUI that are both useful and usable by a vast diversity of users' capacities is still a challenge.

The work described and discussed in this paper is part of a research project that aims at exploring existing NUI devices and testing both their own Accessibility (i.e., its interactability by people with disabilities) and their usage in the context of facilitating everyday actions of people with disabilities. The latter implies in either employing these devices as they are or by altering them or combining them with other devices. This project has two main goals. The first is to propose a conceptual framework for the design of NUI devices that consider the context of Accessibility. The second objective is to design and engineer new devices that not only help people with disabilities, but also that meet the requirements of Universal Design (UD). Once we achieve these goals, products may help in the design of new NUIs that encompass as many users as possible. Therefore, we aim at designing NUI-based technologies with potential of being more inclusive for people with disabilities and more interesting and useful for people without disabilities.

We believe that Organizational Semiotics (OS) can help to achieve these goals by providing a contextualized view of the problem we are dealing with. In this work we use the OS artifacts to clarify and represent our research project, showing how they allow pointing either in the direction of UD or of Assistive Technologies (AT). On one hand, UD means creating products that are usable by anyone, regardless of features such as age, culture, language or disability [START_REF] Welch | What is Universal Design? Strategies for Teaching Universal Design[END_REF]. In Computing, there is a related term, "Universal Access", which refers to ensuring that all people have access to technology and information, and that these computing services are usable by anyone [START_REF] Shneiderman | Universal usability[END_REF]. Although UD might seem very hard or even impossible to achieve, it should at least inspire designers to create better solutions [START_REF] Almeida | Universal Design Principles Combined with Web Accessibility Guidelines : A Case Study[END_REF]. Therefore, we believe UD is a design goal that should guide the design process from the very beginning of a computing project. On the other hand, AT refers to devices or computing systems created to compensate, relieve or neutralize body impairments [START_REF] Gómez | Adaptive manuals as assistive technology to support and train people with acquired brain injury in their daily life activities[END_REF]. This encompasses assisting people with disabilities in the execution of tasks and, in turn, improving their social participation and autonomy. Despite their potential benefits, ATs commonly suffer from abandonment by their users, usually because of difficulties related to adapting to the AT or in learning how to use it. To overcome these problems, it is important to involve the stakeholders in the design process, especially those closest to the users, such as family, friends, caretakers, doctors and nurses [START_REF] Gómez | Adaptive manuals as assistive technology to support and train people with acquired brain injury in their daily life activities[END_REF].

Looking at the two concepts of UD and AT it is possible to see they contrast in how they treat their target users: while UD tries to tend to as many users as possible, ATs focus on helping specific users perform specific tasks. However, they have in common the fact that they both need a deeper consideration of context and both can benefit from SO artifacts. In this paper, we will show how different uses of the artifacts can best promote either AT or UD.

The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2 we give an overview of the theory behind the OS methodology we employed. Then, in Section 3 we present the OS artifacts and the practical scenarios instantiated from them. Section 4 discusses how the different problem-solving approaches taken in each scenario reflect on the SO artifacts and, ultimately, in the final solution. Finally, Section 5 presents our concluding remarks and overview of future work.

Theoretical Basis

The Organizational Semiotics (OS) proposes a comprehensive study of organizations in different levels of abstraction (informal, formal and technical), and their interdependencies. For OS, organizations can themselves be information systems with norms and patterns of well-defined behaviors that regulate the internal processes within the organization. In this sense, an organization is composed of three layers [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]: informal (outer layer), formal (middle layer), and technical (inner layer). The premise behind the use of OS in information systems is understanding the situated context of the organization that the system will be inserted in, and clarifying the main forces that act on it, to propose a technical information system that makes sense for these organizations. Understanding organizational functions from the social level is essential for achieving this goal [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]. To enable a better understanding, development, management and use of information systems, a set of methods known as MEASUR (Methods for Eliciting, Analyzing and Specifying User's Requirements) was developed in the OS [START_REF] Stamper | Information in business and administrative systems[END_REF]. In this paper, we make use of some of these methods aiming at clarifying the problem and proposing solutions, which can have an impact on the design of both Universal Design and Assistive Technologies. For this, we use three artefacts, two of which are from the OS: the Stakeholders Identification Diagram (SID) and the Semiotic Framework (SF). The third one is the Evaluation Frame (EF), used to discuss problems the stakeholders may find and anticipate solutions to them [START_REF] Baranauskas | Guiding the Process of Requirements Elicitation with a Semiotic Approach -A Case Study[END_REF]. We briefly describe them as follows, and in the next sections, we discuss their instantiations in our research project.

The SID [START_REF] Liu | Employing MEASUR Methods for Business Process Reengineering in China[END_REF] facilitates the identification of those involved in a particular design process. SID pays attention to different levels of involvement, interests, and expectations, allowing the visualization of stakeholders and their organizations inside five different categories: Operation, Contribution, Source, Market, and Community. In turn, the EF is intended to support reasoning about problems and solutions related to each stakeholder identified through the SID. Therefore, it favors the clarification and identification of requirements as well as the anticipation of issues that may impact/influence the solution to be designed. EF is represented in a table format where the columns contain problems and solutions, and each line references one of the five SID categories. The idea is to raise, in each of these layers, the identified problems and solutions for each group of stakeholders.

Finally, the SF [START_REF] Stamper | Information in business and administrative systems[END_REF] favors the identification and organization of requirements according to six different levels that represent different aspects of signs. The first three levels can be related to technological issues (the Physical, Empirical, and Syntactic), and the other three levels can be related to aspects of human information functions (Semantic, Pragmatic and Social World). The Physical World indicates the features and signs that can be measured by physical analysis and engineering. Empiric studies the properties of the signs. Syntactic analyzes the relationship between signs (whether formal or structural). Semantic describes the relationship between a sign and their meanings. Pragmatics studies the relationship between a sign and the behavior of the involved agents. Finally, the Social World evokes the need to understand how the rules of interactions between the groups work. The SID and EF were used to clarify the scenarios in which we experienced NUI technologies, while the SF supported the organization and specification of requirements and design decisions to be made. Therefore, these three artifacts contributed with a perception of the problem domain and its possible solutions.

The Instantiated Artifacts and Case Studies

Although the term Natural User Interface (NUI) has gained power after the advent of innovative devices [START_REF] O'hara | On the Naturalness of Touchless : Putting the " Interaction " Back into NUI[END_REF] such as the Microsoft ® Kinect [START_REF]Microsoft: Kinect for Windows[END_REF], NUI-based devices can be created using any kind of input modality, as long as the experience feels natural and the technology best reflects the abilities of its users [START_REF] Wigdor | Brave NUI World: Designing Natural User Interfaces for Touch and Gesture[END_REF]. This means that it is possible to create a Natural User Interface with a combination of older technologies (like mouse and keyboard) with newer ones (like gestural or touch), because the potential for naturalness is in those technologies, but not the guarantee of it. This trade-off between potential and guarantee creates excellent design and research opportunities, since the possible combinations of input and output devices for the creation of new NUIs are countless. However, it also elevates the challenges behind the task, since employing a technology that is recognizably in the NUI paradigm does not give certainty that the resulting device will actually provide a natural experience for the user. Part of the challenge also lies in understanding the NUI-based devices' potential for users and their context of use. This means taking into account different user needs, based on the characteristics of the users themselves and on where they would utilize the technology. In our research project, we look at this problem from the perspective of people with disabilities. We want to investigate how NUIs can help these users in several ways, such as in accomplishing daily tasks, gaining autonomy, being included in society and interacting with other people.

The first step to understand the problem is to look at the stakeholders of the NUI technologies and devices we aim to explore and design. This is where the SID comes in. In the inner layer, Operation, we have the users of the NUI devices, and, as we move to the outer layers, we define other stakeholders such as researchers and developers (Contribution) the users' families and friends (Source and Community), technology companies (Source and Market), Government and society (Community). In the EF, this brings out questions like "How does the device affect user's interactions and relationships with friends and family?" or "How does Government regulation adapt to the new devices?". Furthermore, although we guide our project with the principles of Universal Design [START_REF] Welch | What is Universal Design? Strategies for Teaching Universal Design[END_REF], we are also trying to understand how to better design NUI-based devices for people with disabilities. Therefore, some of our stakeholders are specific to this audience, such as the industry of accessibility materials and associ-ations for people with disabilities. In our EF, this leads to questions like "How do the associations for people with disabilities benefit from the devices and technologies created?", which we answer as "they have early access to prototypes and, later, can use the finished final products". Therefore, the SID and the EF give us a contextualized view of our research problem, helping us anticipate problems and solutions related to each stakeholder. To explore the artifacts even further, we have created from them three different case studies. The following subsections describe these case studies and explain how they contribute to our research problem.

Microsoft ® Kinect and the Visually Impaired

In the first case study, we started from two stakeholders in our SID: "people with disabilities" from the Operation layer, and "technology companies" from the Source layer. We instantiated each as "people with visual impairments" and "Microsoft", or more specifically, its NUI device, the Kinect [START_REF]Microsoft: Kinect for Windows[END_REF]. From there, we focused on the challenge of using the Kinect to help visually impaired people (i.e., the blind or people with low vision) in their daily tasks, such as navigation and recognizing objects, informative signs and people. The Kinect is a device composed of 3D depth sensors, an RGB camera and a microphone. Therefore, the main goal of this study case is to figure out how to translate the visual information input given by the Kinect into an output the target users can easily understand. For this, we chose 3D audio because of its capability of carrying information, such as the location of an object in relation to the user, in an indirect way. To test the applicability of this solution, we built a prototype, uniting the Kinect, bone conduction headphones and algorithms of Computer Vision (to interpret the visual input) and 3D Audio (to generate the auditory output). This prototype allowed us to conduct laboratory experiments with users and figure out technical, ergonomic and usability issues. Since until now we only have conducted experiments in controlled environments, so far we have tried to answer questions from the Operation and Contribution layers of the EF, such as "How efficient is the operation?", "How comfortable does the user feel using the device?" and "How does the user benefit from the device?". Once the experiments reach real-world tests, we will also be able to get feedback on the questions and problems presented in the other layers, like "How can friends and family help the user to configure or learn how to use the device?", taken from the Source layer. Therefore, the main contributions of this case study to our research problem are the insights into the building process of a NUI-based device, especially when the starting point is an already existing NUI technology that needs to be adapted. Additionally, we will also continue to see how the analysis we made with the SID and the EF applies in this instantiation of our research problem.

Samsung ® Galaxy Gear and the Visually Impaired

In the second case study, we again started from two stakeholders in our SID: "people with disabilities" from the Operation layer, and "technology companies" from the Source layer. We instantiated each as "people with visual impairments" and "Sam-sung", or more specifically, one of its NUI devices, the first generation Galaxy Gear [START_REF]Samsung Electronics America: Samsung Galaxy Gear[END_REF]. From there, we focused on the challenge of using this device to help visually impaired people with the task of recognizing people in their surroundings. The Galaxy Gear is a smart wristwatch (or smartwatch) that has an 800 MHz processor, 512MB RAM, 4GB of internal memory, 2 microphones, a speaker, Bluetooth capabilities and a 1.9 Megapixel camera on the wristband. It can also communicate with the user's smartphone to execute tasks such as answering calls and reading messages. Therefore, the main goal of this case study is to figure out whether and how a wearable device such as the smartwatch can help the visually impaired with the task of recognizing people around them. This involves not only developing Computer Vision algorithms that are able to run on a device with limited hardware capabilities, but also figuring out the best ways to provide feedback to users in ways they can easily understand. Additionally, the feedback cannot overwhelm or embarrass the user. We have conducted experiments with users within laboratory conditions and found issues related to software, ergonomics and feedback. Therefore, similar to the first case study we have so far tried to answer questions from the Operation and Contribution layers of our EF. Once we carry on to real-world tests, we will be able to answer questions from the other layers, such as "How does the device affect interactions or relationships between the users and their families or friends?" (taken from the Source layer), or "How does the new device impact on NUI devices companies?" (taken from the Market layer). Additionally, in this case study we are again exploring a NUI technology (smartwatch) within the context of a specific group of users (the visually impaired); however, in this scenario we are not adapting the device on the hardware level so far, but on the software level. Therefore, the main contributions of this case study to our research problem are the insights into adapting, on the software level, a NUI wearable device to perform tasks it did not originally fulfill (recognizing people with the camera). Furthermore, we are also able to see how the analysis made with our SID and EF will continue to apply in a concrete instantiation of our research.

Web of Things in the Supermarket

In the third and last case study, we started from several stakeholders in our SID: "people with disabilities" and "other users" (Operation and Contribution), "technology companies" (Source), "NUI devices companies" (Market), "interested society" (Community) and "Academia" (Community). Their instantiations would be, on one hand, any person interested in receiving help with the task of selecting and finding items in a supermarket ("people with disabilities", "other users" and "interested society"); on the other hand, we have those involved in the area of the Web of Things [START_REF] Zeng | The Web of Things: A Survey (Invited Paper)[END_REF] ("technology companies", "NUI devices companies" and "Academia"). Then, we focused on the challenge of using the Web of Things concepts to help any kind of customer to find and select items in a supermarket.

The Web of Things (WoT) is a research field derived from another field called Internet of Things (IoT). On one hand, the IoT is concerned with the transition of the Internet from a network of computers to a network of trillions of smart "things", such as mobile devices, home appliances and sensors. On the other hand, the WoT revolves around reusing and adapting technologies and protocols that exist in the current Web to build applications that will run in the IoT. Hence, this case study has the goal of using the network of sensors, smartphones and other "things" that may exist into the supermarket to help people in the tasks of finding and choosing products in the establishment. Additionally, the case study also encompasses providing ways to use the WoT to, direct or indirectly, make users help each other. This means providing functionalities that will allow, for instance, people without disabilities to give information that may help people with disabilities, such as product reviews and translation or transcription of information presented on the packing. Notice that this can also be useful to other types of users, such as foreigners, elderly and people who are uncertain about the quality of a product.

After coming up with the general idea of the case study, we looked at the possible technologies that could be used to create the device we are aiming at. We decided an RFID (Radio-Frequency IDentification) reader, some RFID tags and a text-to-speech software were enough for a first experiment. Despite the controlled conditions of our simulated supermarket, we discovered important issues related to the sound feedback, especially regarding the semantics and the syntactic structure of the information given to the user. More specifically, several users could not comprehend the directions to find the sections of the supermarket, and others had trouble understanding reviews of products left by other users. These issues are direct reflections of questions from our EF, such as "How efficient is the operation?" (Operation layer) and "How do users report problems?" (Contribution). Once we move on our experiments to noncontrolled environments, we will be able to answer questions from other layers, like "How do supermarkets benefit from the device?" (Market layer) and "How can academia benefit from the device?" (Community layer). Therefore, the main contributions of this case study to our research problem are the insights into creating a device that, from the start, is aimed at any user and that helps people with disabilities. Additionally, also gain perspective on how our analysis made with the SID and the EF work on this instantiation of our research problem.

Results and Discussion

Each of the case studies described in the previous section was informed by analysis on the same SID and EF. However, while the first two scenarios adopted the approach of starting the design from an existing NUI technology, the third one started from the problem and looked for technological solutions to it. These two different approaches (and their consequences) can be evidenced in the Semiotic Framework (Fig. 1)

If we think about the organizational onion [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF], the first two case studies have taken the direction that goes from the technical layer to the informal layer, while the third case study started in the informal layer and went to the technical layer. Looking at this in the SF, the first two case studies started in the most bottom step, the Physical World, by defining the technologies they would use in their designs (Kinect or smartwatch) and moved to the top step, the Social World. In turn, the third case study went the opposite way, by defining the problem and the concern for Universal Design in the top step, and then moving down to reach the Physical World. Hence, from now on in this text we will refer to the first approach as "bottom-up" and to the second as "top-down". If we make a more detailed analysis, we can see the impact each approach has in each level of the SF (Fig. 1). The bottom-up approach starts in the Physical World by choosing a NUI device and combining it with the necessary auxiliary technologies, such as white cane for the blind user, headphones to receive audio output and, lastly, the multichannel communication needs to be considered. In the case of the Kinect, hardware and software modifications were made to implement one of the channels: the audio. In the case of the smartwatch, only software adaptations were necessary since the device's hardware already has multichannel capabilities. Moving on to the Empiric layer, the efficiency of the audio feedback is tested and adjusted, usually by software. Then, in the Syntactic layer, the pattern and format of the feedback are defined and possibly require more adjustments. In the Semantic step, we consider how much the audio cues are understandable to the users, and possibly make more adjustments. In the Pragmatic layer, we see how much the device as a whole is actually helping the user in the execution of a task. Finally, in the Social World step we consider issues related to embarrassment and segregation. In contrast, the top-down approach starts by defining the problem (finding and selecting products on a supermarket) and committing to Universal Design, i.e., helping as many types of users as possible in the accomplishment of the chosen tasks. Moving to the Pragmatic layer, we think about how to provide communications between users, and how to make these communications useful for them and compatible with the proposed problem. Then, in the Semantic step, we design the input (commands) and output (feedback) messages so that they are understandable by as many users as possible.

In the Syntactic layer this reflects upon the format we will choose for the messages, the types of senses (vision, tact, hearing…) we will choose to reach and which databases we will use. This also carries on to the Empiric layer, where we consider which communication channels to use and how efficient each one is. Finally, in the Physical World we actually select the devices that will be used and combine them to achieve a prototype of the solution. Therefore, it is possible to note that, on one hand, the bottom-up approach requires software and hardware implementation from the very start, and for each step we move up on the SF, adjustments are required, which can be very costly both for designers (time and labor) and users (time). Additionally, the bottom-up approach also offers less flexibility in terms of the technologies employed, since they are chosen very early. This also implicates that once we reach the Social World it may be very difficult to adapt the current physical apparatus to fit all. On the other hand, the top-down approach only commits to specific physical devices in the very last step, allowing designers to consider UD-related issues much earlier. This gives them freedom to select the NUI devices and technologies that best fit the requirements they came up with during the descent from the Social World to the Empiric layer. This can save both time and money, since it will be possible to compare, in the Physical World, the different options that satisfy the requirements and then select the one that costs the least. We believe that these crucial differences in the two approaches point to the contrast between designing an Assistive Technology (AT) and designing a solution that follows Universal Design (UD). While AT usually refers to a device or computing system that assists people with disabilities [START_REF] Gómez | Adaptive manuals as assistive technology to support and train people with acquired brain injury in their daily life activities[END_REF], UD defends the creation of products that are usable by the greatest possible extend of categories of users [START_REF] Welch | What is Universal Design? Strategies for Teaching Universal Design[END_REF]. Hence, the SF indicates that, in the context of designing new NUI-based devices with a special attention to users with disabilities, the bottom-up approach may lead to an Assistive Technology that will most likely to address a specific category of user. In contrast, the topdown approach seems to promote Universal Design solutions. It is important to note, however, that within an iterative design process, it is possible to adapt the designs so they can address a wider variety of users, but this adaptation seems to be much more difficult if we are adopting the bottom-up approach.

Conclusions and Future Work

In this paper, we used the lens of Organizational Semiotics on a research project that aims at exploring the existing NUI-based devices in the context of Accessibility, either by testing their potential as assistive technology or by investigating how they can allow everyday actions of people with disabilities and others as well. The ultimate goals of this project are creating new NUI-based devices and proposing guidelines or conceptual frameworks for designing these devices in the future. The results of this study showed the usefulness of the Stakeholders Diagram and the Evaluation Frame to guide the creation of three different case studies scenarios and, in return, how the discoveries made in each case study reflected differently in the artifacts. In addition, we observed that the different directions of designing the scenarios reflected in the organization of requirements in the Semiotic Ladder. Finally, we observed evidence that starting a design from the top or from the bottom steps of the Semiotic Framework can have a huge impact on the way the resulting technology will address the user, either leading to an assistive technology or a solution for all, aligned to the principles of Universal Design.

We believe this evidence illustrates the contribution of Organizational Semiotics artifacts towards a design for all, especially in the context of using NUI state of the art devices. Hence, our future work includes proceeding with further iterations of each case study scenario to understand other semiotic aspects of those technologies in their real world usage.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Requirements represented in the Semiotic Framework (SF).

Acknowledgments. We would like to thank the support of the Institute of Computing at the State University of Campinas, of the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior -CAPES (process #01-P-04554/2013), and of the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico -CNPq (process #142113/2013-1).