Michailidou Barcelona 2009

8/16/2019 Michailidou Barcelona 2009

1/11


2/11

iii

PROCEEDINGS OF THEIADIS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

MOBILE LEARNING 2009

BARCELONA, SPAIN

FEBRUARY 26-28, 2009

Organised byIADIS

International Association for Development of the Information Society


3/11

iv

Copyright 2009

IADIS Press

All rights reserved

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the materialis concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, recitation,

broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other way, and storage in data banks.Permission for use must always be obtained from IADIS Press. Please contact [email protected]

Edited by Inmaculada Arnedillo Sánchez and Pedro Isaías

Associate Editors: Luís Rodrigues and Patrícia Barbosa

ISBN: 978-972-8924-77-5


4/11

‘VIRTUAL GUIDE’: EVALUATION OF A MOBILEMUSEUM VISIT

Natasa Michailidou and Dr. Despoina TsiafakiCultural and Educational Technology Institute (CETI)/ Research Centre ‘Athena’

58 Tsimiski str., 67100 Xanthi, Greece

ABSTRACT

The ‘Virtual Guide’ project developed an advanced Guide system for Museums and Exhibitions using low-costtechnologies. The goal of the ‘Virtual Guide’ project was to offer a rich and interesting visiting experience and toimprove the attractiveness and accessibility of Museums and their exhibits.Operation Scenario: The visitor enters a Museum and picks up a portable electronic device (PDA) in the reception. He

registers his profile and selects one of the available tours. The ‘Virtual Guide’ system provides automated locationawareness and rich multimedia and interactive content.The focus of the present paper is the Evaluation procedure that ran through the ‘Virtual Guide’ project and was dividedinto Front-end, Formative and Summative. This procedure aimed to include in the design and implementation of the

project the demands and needs of the potential users from a PDA-based guide for Museums.

KEYWORDS

Museum, Technology, PDA, Virtual Guide, Evaluation.

1. INTRODUCTION

Information and Communications Technology (ICT), with its various experimentations and applications inthe context of the modern Museum world, has changed the scenery in these cultural settings in varioussectors (Owen, et al., 2004; Rowland & Rojas, 2006; Bentley, 2007). Regarding visitors and the interpretivetools offered to them, ICT can contribute significantly and can cover the different interests or preferred waysof learning of a multivariate public.

Within this context the Museum society nowadays becomes more and more interested in the possibilitiesof handheld computers or PDAs (Personal Digital Assistants) (CHIN, 2003; Proctor & Tellis, 2003; Tellis,2004; Raptis, et al., 2005; Proctor, 2005; Pes, et al., 2006). These devices can trace, mainly through wirelessnetworks, the location of the user and provide multimedia information relevant to the object of interest.

Handheld computers have been introduced in various Museums since the 1990s and have generateddebates about their actual and potential role in the interpretive, social and overall Museum experience.Reasons for the experimentation with this technology were the provision of alternative interpretive tools forthe visitors, the integration of new technologies in the galleries, the support of people with disabilities, the

attraction of greater visitor numbers, especially of young age etc.The current paper presents the design, implementation and results of the Evaluation that took place duringthe ‘Virtual Guide’ project. This research was based in relevant international theory and practice (Crawford,2005; Damala & Kockelcorn, 2006; Taylor, 2007). The Evaluation was divided into three parts, Front-end,Formative and Summative, and its importance lies in the Museological point of view, from which it wasconducted, as well as in the rareness of relevant publications regarding the Museum world in Greece.

2. ‘VIRTUAL GUIDE’

The ‘Virtual Guide’ developed an advanced Guide system for Museums and Exhibitions using low-costtechnologies (CETI, 2007). The project aimed a) to provide a rich contextualized, multimedia and interactive

IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning 2009

181


5/11

experience to the visitor, b) to improve access to the collections and exhibitions, c) to reinforce the visitor's‘cultural experience’ as a whole, d) to help the Museum world provide multiple entry points to a wide anddifferentiated public, e) to bring the Cultural Heritage closer to the public and e) to enhance the culturalimpact of the Exhibitions.

A suggestive Operation Scenario can be the following: The visitor enters a Museum and picks up a portable electronic device (PDA) in the reception. He registers his profile (age, knowledge or interest leveletc.) and selects one of the available tours (according to theme, duration etc.). The ‘Virtual Guide’ system

provides automated location awareness (through RFID tags and readers) and rich multimedia and interactivecontent, which is essentially context adaptive (Figure 1).

The basic functionality of the ‘Virtual Guide’ system is simple. A Museum is equipped with a wirelessnetwork, a central content management system and a navigation aid application, which has access toinformation stored in a database. The ‘Virtual Guide’ has an automated location awareness that recognizesthe user’s location in the area.

The structure of the system relies on several web-based subsystems: 1) Collection Management system(essentially the Museum’s database), 2) Content and PDAs Management system (for the correspondence ofmultimedia material to exhibits in another database, the creation of tour scenarios, the administration of themultimedia database and the management of the actual visits with the PDAs), 3) PDA Applications (for the

correspondence of the RFID tags to exhibits and the initialization of the PDA tour) and 4) Additionalapplications (e-shop, log data management, educational applications, print or email of exhibit information).The Museological study of the program included a literature review as a secondary research, a Front-end

evaluation as a primary one (Tsiafaki & Michailidou, 2007), the collaboration with the technology team inorder for the system to serve best the Museums and the public (Tsiafaki, et al., 2007; Tsiafaki & Michailidou,2008a; Tsiafaki & Skoulariki, 2008; Michailidou & Tsiafaki, 2008), a Formative evaluation, the content edit,the creation of a Demo scenario and a Summative evaluation (Tsiafaki & Michailidou, 2008b; Tsiafaki &Michailidou, 2008c).

Figure 1. The basic architecture of the ‘Virtual Guide’ system

The ‘Virtual Guide’ system was installed and pilot-tested in the Ecclesiastical Museum ofAlexandroupolis in North-Eastern Greece. Primary goal for the system, though, was to be applicable withminor adjustments or not, to any Museum or Gallery. The system manager of any Museum has the possibilityto adjust the tours, texts, the multimedia content and the various system components to the demands of everyexhibition, target group, desired outcome etc.

ISBN: 978-972-8924-77-5 © 2009 IADIS

182


6/11

3. EVALUATION IN THE ‘VIRTUAL GUIDE’

Evaluation in the context of Museology aims in general at a systematic investigation and assessment ofMuseum exhibitions, programmes, services etc. (Diamond, 1999; Korn & Borun, 2003; Dawson, et al., 2004;Galloway & Stanley, 2004). In the context of the ‘Virtual Guide’ project and throughout its whole duration,Evaluation was considered an essential part of it. It integrated Usability Heuristics (Nielsen, 1994), but it was

primarily concentrated on the Evaluation of the guided tour from a Museological and not only aTechnological point of view. The procedure was conducted in three stages with the use of various tools andwith different goals for each stage (Table 1).

Table 1. The stages and the tools used in the Evaluation of the ‘Virtual Guide’ project

Evaluation When How Whoa. Front-end 11/2006-5/2007 Questionnaire: 69% Museums: 18

Interview: 31% Public (visitors and non-visitors): 82 b. Formative 3/2008 Interview: 33% Ecclesiastical Museum: 1

Observation: 67% CETI: 2

c. Summative 5-6/2008 Interview: 60% Public (visitors): 3Observation: 40% CETI: 2

a. The first stage, the Front-end Evaluation, aimed to finger the demands of the future users of the ‘VirtualGuide’ project,

b. the second, the Formative Evaluation, aimed to analyze the effectiveness of the ‘Content Managementsystem’, the main subsystem for the creation of the multimedia database and the PDA tours and

c. the third stage, the Summative Evaluation, aimed to evaluate the guided tour with the PDA itself.On the whole, this Evaluation procedure intended to include in the design and implementation of the

project the demands and needs of the potential users from a PDA-based guide for Museums. The term ‘user’comprised both Museums and their visitors (end-users), but these two target groups were studied separately.

3.1 Front-end Evaluation

3.1.1 Methodology

The Front-end Evaluation was designed and implemented in the early stages of the ‘Virtual Guide’ projectand it resulted in the definition of the ‘User Requirements’ (Tsiafaki & Michailidou, 2008a).

The Questionnaires used in the Evaluation were chosen as a mean that can investigate different issues in acertain time and can be sent via post to many recipients. In order to avoid, as possible, the method’s restraints(misapprehension of the questions, inaccurate answers, etc.), we included both open-ended and closedquestions for each issue examined.

The Questionnaires were sent to the participants or served as a base for Interviews. The Interviews wereconducted selectively with Museum representatives and groups of Teachers and Pupils (focus groupsdiscussions). Interviews can be a very time-consuming procedure, but their results are extensive and oftenunexpected (Table 2).

Table 2.The participants in the Front-end Evaluation

MUSEUMS PUBLIC(visitors and non visitors)

Number 18 Number 82Questionnaire 55% Questionnaire 83%Interview 45% Interview 17%Total 100% Total 100%Private 44% Visitors 58%State 39% Non visitors 42%Municipal 0% Total 100%


183


7/11

Others 17% Adult visitors 22%Total 100% Adult non visitors 22%Thematic 32% Adult visitors with children 11%Archaeological 17% Non Greek adult visitors 10%Folk-ethnological 11% Disabled people-non visitors 9%Art 11% Teachers-visitors 9%Ecclesiastical 11% Teachers-non visitors 5%Historic 6% Pupils-visitors 6%Byzantine 6% Pupils-non visitors 6%Science-technology 6% Total 100%Total 100%

On the one hand, we were interested in extracting numbers, percentages from the Museums but also their problems and future directions regarding the following issues and the possible connection of the latter to aPDA-based guide. The issues were 1) Visitor numbers, 2) Collections, 3) Exhibitions, 4) Services, 5)Relation to New Technologies and 6) Human Resources. The Museums asked to participate were varied interms of theme, size and legal status, while the response rate was 62%.

On the other hand, regarding the public, we contacted more than 80 people, visitors and non visitors ofthe Ecclesiastical Museum. We investigated 1) their needs in terms of interpretation in Museums and 2) theirexpectations from a PDA-based Museum guide. We used Questionnaires, but also ‘brainstorming’ in theInterviews with Teachers and Pupils.

The data from the Front-end Evaluation were related to the activities of the Museums in 2005 and theywere analyzed with the computer programs Microsoft Excel 2003 and SPSS 11. The present announcementincludes only the most important conclusions.

3.1.2 Results: Museums

The data gathered from the Museums led us to the following conclusions, taken into account in the design ofthe ‘Virtual Guide’: 1) The Museums with many visitors from the Formal Education have welcomed the ideaof a ‘Virtual Guide’ more than the rest of the Museums (Visitor numbers); 2) 66% of the participants stated

that they hold 1.000-10.000 objects in storage, a large number which could be easily accessed through the‘Virtual Guide’ (Collections); 3) The temporary Exhibitions, present in almost half of the Museums, revealedthe need for an application adjustable in various spaces and themes (Exhibitions); 4) The provision for non-Greek speaking and disable people is considered a priority for today’s Museums (Services); 5) ICT as aninterpretation tool is considered an asset by the majority of the Museums, while PDAs more specifically aremore welcomed by the institutions that don’t use ICT in exhibitions than by those who do (NewTechnologies); and 6) as for Human Resources 56% of the participating Museums stated that they do employat least one ICT expert.

3.1.3 Results: Public

The data gathered from the public led us to the following conclusions, taken into account in the design of the‘Virtual Guide’: First of all, the evaluation of the existing interpretative tools in the Ecclesiastical Museumshowed that the system to be created needed to include specifically the dynamism of the traditional guided

tours and to overcome their lacks, such as the limitations of oral communication. Moreover, the enthusiasmof the Adult visitors who were accompanying children regarding a PDA-based guided showed the need tocater for this group, rather neglected in the Greek Museums.

Interesting evidence coming from the Adult visitors, the Teachers and the Pupils underlined theimportance of videos, firstly, and audio, secondly, as content for the PDA, whereas the non-Greek speakingvisitors requested more text in a handheld guide. More specifically the data from the School community

pointed out the need for ‘edutainment’ and the connection of the PDA’s content to the relevant Curriculum,while disabled people stated the important advantages of using a PDA-based Museum guide from their pointof view.

ISBN: 978-972-8924-77-5 © 2009 IADIS

184


8/11

3.2 Formative Evaluation

3.2.1 Methodology

Later on during the ‘Virtual Guide’ project (Table 1) there was the need to see how effective and easy was touse two basic elements of the system: 1) the ‘Content Management System’ (CMS) and 2) the ‘PDAApplications’. The ‘PDA Applications’ were used for the correspondence of the RFID tags to exhibits(Figure 2a) and the actual PDA tour for the visitor (Figure 3). The CMS, a web based application, allowedthe Museum to insert and edit material for the basic structure units: Exhibits, Interconnections (of exhibits),Tour scenarios, Dictionary and Educational activities (Figure 2b).

In this type of Evaluation the case-study Museum participated with the help of a Questionnaire-basedInterview, the feedback to which served as a basis for changes and corrections. The Questionnaire tested thecompletion of several basic tasks of the CMS and included open-ended and closed questions. Apart from theremarks of the Museum, the Cultural Heritage Department of CETI also got familiarized with the twosubsystems and made relevant recommendations. Actual users did not participate in this stage due to lack oftime and sufficient resources.

Figure 2. a) The PDA Application for the placement of the tag in the Museum space, b) The content fields for an exhibitand its preview in the CMS

3.2.2 Results: Ecclesiastical Museum

The most important remarks of the Museum regarding the CMS were the following: The connection ofmultimedia material to an Exhibit, the Interconnection of relevant exhibits as well as the insertion of terms inthe Dictionary did not have serious problems and were rather satisfactory. Moreover, the preview of theexhibit’s page in the desktop computer worked well and was considered a very important feature of thesystem. The page in the system for the creation and edit of the Tour scenarios was thought to be a bitcomplicated and the use of the help page was mandatory (this remark led to the creation of printedinstructions of the whole system). Last, the Educational activity or tour, included in the system, was not verywell received and was considered rather difficult to understand, use and edit.

3.2.3 Results: CETI

Apart from the Museum, the Department of Cultural Heritage of the CETI, which was responsible for theMuseological part of the project, also made several recommendations.

As for the PDA Application, it was very easy to use and had no problems. Through this application anexhibit or even a space in the Museum (i.e. the introductory hall) can be connected to one or more RFID tags,which will trigger the dispatch of multimedia information related to that exhibit or space during the actualPDA tour.


185


9/11

The recommendations regarding the CMS referred mostly to issues like the simplification of the Menuand the use of Greek terms in the system, where possible, the provision for future changes in the graphicdesign of the system’s interface to adjust to other Museums and the need for printed instructions.

3.3 Summative Evaluation

3.3.1 Methodology

The Summative Evaluation used the combination of the following tools: 1) Questionnaires, to which PDAusers could answer on their own or in the context of Focus group discussions and 2) Observation of PDAusers to record the way the device was used and their reactions.

1) The Questionnaires included, except for demographics, open-ended and closed questions regarding theuse of the PDA (interface, interaction, RFID technology etc.) and the overall visit experience (demo tourscenario, multimedia content etc.). This Questionnaire served as the base for a Focus group discussion with 3

participants in order to acquire more detailed answers. 2) The Observation of the PDA users was related tothe way they were touring the Museum with the handheld device, their interaction with the exhibits and

potentially other people in the Museum.

3.3.2 Results: Public

The participants in the Focus group discussion were 3 young women, 18-30 years old, two of which hadvisited the Ecclesiastical Museum before. The participants had MSc in Cultural Informatics, in Conservationand MA in Archaeology correspondingly, whereas two of them had used a PDA before, rarely or often, onceeven as a Museum guide. In general, the participants do not represent the majority or the average Museumvisitor, but they were chosen in order to make more detailed and useful remarks.

Figure 3. Screens of the PDA tour: a) explanation of the basic application buttons, b) main screen of an exhibit and c) themap of a room.

On the one hand, the PDA users liked or understood rather easily: the use of the RFID reader in the PDAand the relevant tags in the exhibits; the texts in the PDA that were interesting to them, that were notrepeating the information already available in wall texts and were redirecting them to the displays (Figure3b); the exhibits that had video-based information. The participants specifically underlined the potentials ofthis type of PDA tour in the Museum. They acknowledged that this mobile technology offers a very powerfultool for modern Museums. The various collections and exhibitions can ‘come to life’ and approach the publicin an educational and fun way (edutainment).

On the other hand, the PDA users disliked or had troubles with: the Museum ground plans used in thePDA to orientate and guide the users (Figure 3c); the lack of a help button throughout the entire guided tourand the lack of any sound or music; the long texts that were attracting their attention from the actual exhibits;

ISBN: 978-972-8924-77-5 © 2009 IADIS

186


10/11

the buttons in the screen which, they thought, were taking up too much space from the screen (Figure 3a); theavailable tours that were not thematic, but they were constructed based on the expressed interest andknowledge of the visitor regarding the ecclesiastic art and the orthodox religion.

3.3.3 Results: CETI

Apart from the remarks of the three participants, the Evaluator made the following observations. The need forinstructing the visitors how to use the device a) in the Museum reception, with printed material or orally, or

b) in the context of ‘Help’, is vital for the better use of the PDA. Moreover, there is the need to experimentwith alternative maps for the orientation of the public and with alternative application buttons.

As for the visit experience itself, it has to be underlined that, despite any set tour, each visitor will tour theMuseum according to his or her own pace, needs and desires. Thus, it is advisable that the PDA leaves somespace for free tours and visitor initiative. Nevertheless, videos are a good element to exist in all availabletours, as they were much appreciated in both front-end and summative evaluation.

4. CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of handheld guides in Museums presupposes the consideration of multiple issues, with theintention of ensuring that this technology will not be an end in itself but will act as an auxiliary mean for theimprovement of the Museum experience. The ‘Virtual Guide’ project, being museo-centric, with itstechnological part to play a supportive role to the museological needs and demands, aimed to be flexible anduser-friendly.

The Evaluation, which as a procedure, ran through the ‘Virtual Guide’ project had very important resultsthat contributed to correcting mistakes and pointing out issues in every step of the way. By collecting,treating and publishing these results we contribute to the literature an integrated, methodic and interestingexample of Evaluation of ICT in the Greek Museum sector. This paper presented the basic aims, structureand results of the Evaluation that took place.

Moreover, 1) the continuous use of the PDA in the Ecclesiastical Museum, 2) the creation and elaborationof more thematic PDA tours with rich content in the same Museum and 3) the Evaluation of these tours bythe visitors can all conduce to the broader satisfaction of the needs of the users, both the Museum and theend-users. Future publications will present how the ‘Virtual Guide’ can adjust in other Museum settings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We wish to acknowledge the valuable help of the ‘Virtual Guide’ partners (PRISMA Electronics, INA andthe Ecclesiastical Museum of Alexandroupolis) the Museums and the public which have participated in theEvaluation of the ‘Virtual Guide’ project.

The Project "Virtual Guide: Intelligent Multimedia Museum Navigation with Wireless Technology" wascarried out under the framework of the Regional Development Programme of East Macedonia - Thrace andwas co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund and the Region of East Macedonia - Thracewith final beneficiary the Greek Secretariat for Research and Technology.

REFERENCES

Bentley, A., 2007. Advanced Information Communication Technologies and Heritage. Proceedings of ICHIM07 .Toronto, Ontario, Canada [Online] Available at: http://www.archimuse.com/ichim07/papers/bentley/bentley.html[Accessed 4 June 2008]

Canadian Heritage Information Network (CHIN), 2003. Tip sheets: Personal Digital Assistants (PDA) [Online] Availableat: http://www.chin.gc.ca/English/Digital_Content/Tip_Sheets/Pda/ [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Crawford, V., 2005. Framework for design and evaluation of Mobile Applications in informal learning contexts.Proceedings of the Electronic Guidebook Forum 2005. San Francisco, California, USA, pp. 46-48 [Online] Availableat: http://www.exploratorium.edu/guidebook/eguides_forum2005.pdf [Accessed 15 October 2006]


187


11/11

Cultural and Educational Technology Institute (CETI), 2007. Virtual Guide [Online] Available at:http://vguide.ipet.gr/en/index.htm [Accessed 4 September 2007]

Damala, A. & Kockelcorn, H., 2006. Evaluation strategies for mobile museum guides: a theoretical framework.Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Museology: Audiovisuals as Cultural Heritage and their Use in

Museums . Mytilene, Greece, pp. in press.Dawson, D., et al., 2004. User Evaluation: Sharing Expertise to Build Shared Values. Proceedings of Museums and the

Web 2004. Toronto, Canada [Online] Available at: http://www.archimuse.com/mw2004/papers/dawson/dawson.html[Accessed 20 November 2007]

Diamond, J., 1999. Practical Evaluation Guide: Tools for Museums & Other Informal Educational Settings . AltamiraPress, New York.

Galloway, S. & Stanley, J., 2004. Thinking outside the box: galleries, Museums and evaluation. Museum and society ,vol.2, no.2, pp. 125-146 [Online] Available at: http://www.le.ac.uk/ms/m&s/Issue%205/galloway.pdf [Accessed 20October 2006]

Korn, R. & Borun, M. eds., 2003. Introduction to Museum evaluation . American Association of Museums, WashingtonDC.

Michailidou, N. & Tsiafaki, D., 2008. Educational activities in Museum PDAs. Museology (submitted in March 2008). Nielsen, J., 1994. Heuristics Evaluation. In Nielsen, J. & Mack, R.L. (eds.). Usability Inspection Methods. John Wiley &

Sons, New York.Owen, R., et al., 2004. Identifying technologies used in Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of VAST 2004. Brussels and

Oudenaarde, Belgium, pp. 155-163 [Online] Available at: http://public-repository.epoch-net.org/deliverables/D2.2.1-Report%20on%20Vert%20Int%20Annex.pdf [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Pes, J. et al., 2006. Working knowledge: handheld guides. Museum Practice, vol. 34, pp. 45-62.Proctor, N., 2005. Off base or on target? Pros and cons of wireless and location-aware applications in the Museum.

Proceedings of ICHIM05 . Paris, France [Online] Available at:http://www.archimuse.com/publishing/ichim05/Proctor.pdf [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Proctor, N. & Tellis, C., 2003. The State of the Art in Museum Handhelds in 2003. Proceedings of Museums and the Web2003. Charlotte, North Carolina, USA [Online] Available at: http://www.archimuse.com/mw2003/papers/proctor/proctor.html [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Raptis, D., et al., 2005. Context-based design of mobile applications for Museums: a survey of existing practices.Proceedings of MobileHCI ’05 . Salzburg, Austria, pp. 153-160 [Online] Available at:http://hci.ece.upatras.gr/pubs_files/c98_Raptis_Tselios_Avouris_MobileHCI2005.pdf [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Rowland, N. & Rojas, F., 2006. Bringing technology back in: a critique of the institutionalist perspective on Museums. Museum and Society , vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 84-95 [Online] Available at:http://www.le.ac.uk/ms/m&s/issue%2011/rowland%20rojas.pdf [Accessed 20 March 2007]

Taylor, J., 2007. Evaluating Mobile Learning: What are appropriate methods for evaluating learning in mobileenvironments? Sharples, M., ed. Big Issues in Mobile Learning . Nottingham, University of Nottingham, pp. 26-28[Online] Available at:http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/Publications_PDFs/BIG_ISSUES_REPORT_PUBLISHED.pdf [Accessed 5December 2007]

Tellis, C., 2004. Multimedia Handhelds: One Device, Many Audiences. Proceedings of Museums and the Web 2004 .Arlington, Virginia / Washington DC, USA [Online] Available at:http://www.archimuse.com/mw2004/papers/tellis/tellis.html [Accessed 4 March 2006]

Tsiafaki, D., et al., 2007. Virtual Guide: User Requirements and Museological Study [Study] Xanthi, CETI.Tsiafaki, D. & Michailidou, N., 2007 . Virtual Guide: Front-End Evaluation. [Survey] Xanthi, CETI.

Tsiafaki, D. & Michailidou, N., 2008a. Virtual Guide: User Requirements for the Museum experience in the 21st century.Proceedings of EVA 2008. Florence, Italy, pp. 206-211.Tsiafaki, D. & Michailidou, N., 2008b . Virtual Guide: Formative and Summative Evaluation [Study] . Xanthi, CETI.Tsiafaki, D. & Michailidou, N., 2008c . Virtual Guide: Feasibility study [Study] . Xanthi, CETI.Tsiafaki, D. & Skoulariki, D., 2008. We went digital. And now what? Proceedings of CIDOC 2008. Athens, Greece

[Online] Available at: http://www.cidoc2008.gr/cidoc/Documents/papers/drfile.2008-06-18.7012006233 [Accessed20 September 2008]

ISBN: 978-972-8924-77-5 © 2009 IADIS

188

Michailidou Barcelona 2009

Documents

Transcript of Michailidou Barcelona 2009