474 X. Wang, F. Fang, and L. Fan 4.2.1.3 Class: Category.The Category covers many resource types depends on the structure, application, format etc. This class is defined carefully and amply. In Cate- gory we reference the learning object hierarchy made by David Wiley and this kind of taxonomy is based on the structural qualities of learning object, show in Table 1. We also list the resource format as many as we can. Table 1. Learning object hierarchy 4.2.2 Relationships There are two kinds of basic relationships: As an ontology, OntoLo has all of the inherent relationships, such as Is-a, Kind-of, Instance-of etc. As an education ontol- ogy(Domain Ontology), there are some special relations as well, such as Composed- of, Target-of etc. 4.2.3 Properties After all the classes are created we should define the properties(slots in Protégé) of classes. We set the properties by referencing the CELTS-42(Metadata Application Fig. 2. An instance and part of its properties Ontology-Based Description of Learning Object 475 Specification of Basic Education Resource ) which is based on CELTS-3(Learning Object Metadata)and faces to the basic education in China. One thing should be noticed is that all subclasses of a class inherit the slots of their super-class. Subclass can have properties themselves. Slots can have different facets describing the value type, allowed values, the number of the values (cardinality), and other features of the values the slot can take. For example, the value of a title slot is a string. That is, name is a slot with value type String. Part of the slots are showed in Fig.2. 4.2.4 Instances Creating individual instances of classes in the hierarchy is the last step. For example, we create an individual instance Englishtest1 to represent a specific type of English (subclass of Language which is subclass of Learning Object) and fulfill the slot value and then this instance has the following slot values defined in Fig.2. 4.3 Learning Object Ontology Sharable Model In the domain people who have different backgrounds and perspectives needed a consistent framework or specific model to organize the relative knowledge, which enable the understanding and communication between people, keep the semantic consistency and share the common understanding of the domain knowledge. Ontology provides the consistent framework and specific model rightly. The ontology-based description of learning object can support to share and reuse the resources online strongly. The three-layer sharing model of Learning Object Ontology is proposed here by some concepts from linguistics. This sharing model can implement in Semantic Web framework. In the first-layer, languages base on XML syntax can transform from each other. In the Semantic layer, metadata and ontology provide sufficient descriptions of resources, and metadata interoperability and ontology mapping are supporting. At last the "share" will be meaningless without educational context. The Web-based educa- tion environment and Semantic Web supported are the context layer of this sharable model. Languages Syntax Semantics P ragmatics Context Fig. 3. Learning Object Ontology Sharable Model 5 Conclusion and Further Research The central idea of learning object is not its form, but it is share and reuse. Learning object enables and facilitates reuse of educational content online. It can be combined with other learning objects for different learning purposes. Ontology-based descrip- tion of learning object can strengthen the reusability. During this research we are also interested in the learning context and instructional design theory. The reusability of 476 X. Wang, F. Fang, and L. Fan learning objects and their ultimate efficacy is linked to the issue of contextualization [8]. All above is just a rough depiction, too many works had to do and this learning object ontology is under improving. Based this learning object ontology we can enjoy many benefits: the sharing common understanding of the information structure in domain; enabling reuse of domain knowledge and making explicit domain assump- tions. Thus in further research we are going to research Ontology-based relationship between learning object and learning design. Acknowledgment. The development of this paper was funded by Technology Development Projects of Beijing Municipal Education Commission #KM200610028016. References 1. Devedzic, V.: Semantic Web and Education. Springer Science-hBusiness Media, LLC, USA (2006) 2. What are Learning Objects, http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/CIE/AOP/LO_what.html 3. Gasevi, D., Djuric, D., Devedzic, V.: Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Develop- ment. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) 4. LSTC: Draft Standard for Learning Object Metadata, http://ltsc.ieee.org/ wg12/files 5. China ELearning Technology Standardization Committee, http://www.celtsc.edu.cn/ 6. Noy, N.F., McGuinnes, D.L.: Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology, http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/papers/ 7. Qin, J., Hernández, N.: Ontological Representation of Learning Objects: Building Interop- erable Vocabulary and Structures. In: WWW 2004, New York, USA, pp. 348–349 (2004) 8. Wiley, D.A.: Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and taxonomy (2002), http://www.reusability.org/read/ hapters/wiley.doc F. Li et al. (Eds.): ICWL 2008, LNCS 5145, pp. 477–485, 2008. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008 Studies on Human Computer Interface Design of Chinese Mobile Phone Users Xue-Min Zhang 1,* , Yong-Na Li 2 , and Fran C. Blumberg 3 1 School of Psychology, State Key Lab of Cognitive and Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China, 100875 xmzhang@bnu.edu.cn 2 Department of Psychology, New York State University at Albany, NY, USA theliyn@yahoo.com.cn 3 Graduate School of Education, Fordham University, NY, USA blumberg@fordham.edu Abstract. In present paper, we briefly presented a series researches from our lab which investigated font size, different pairings of font and background color on Chinese users’ ability to effectively read messages and navigate a Chinese mobile phone interface. The findings of the studies from our lab may generalize from mobile phone message reading and menu operation to other circumstances where there is a small screen interface, such as mobile web interfaces, palmtop computers, and electronic dictionaries and other mobile e-learning devices. The results had significant implications on interface design of mobile small screen devices and mobile e-learning devices. Keywords: Chinese Mobile Phone Interface, Mobile Small Screen Device, Mobile E-Learning Device. 1 Introduction Rapid growth in computer and communication technology has prompted the devel- opment of human-computer interfaces and communication equipment for diverse me- diums ranging from desktop computers to mobile communication tools. In China, mobile communication tools, such as cell phones, are widely used. For example, China had 140 million cell-phone users in 2001 (McMillan, 2001)[1], over 300 mil- lion in 2004 (Dan, 2004)[2] According to recent reports internally (Ministry of In- formation Industry of the People’s Republic of China for 2006)[3] and externally (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2007)[4], China ranks first in mobile phone ownership. This ranking takes into account over 460 million users and the number is expected to increase to 520 million by the end of 2007, and China remains the current largest cell-phone market in the world. The research studies reported here concern features of the cell phone interface that have implications for effective navigation among Chinese users. This work is necessitated as available research on mobile * Corresponding Author. 478 X M. Zhang, Y N. Li, and F.C. Blumberg communication tool interfaces to examine how to best present Chinese content on a small screen. The design of efficient screen presentation is an interesting challenge. Generally, the size of the cell phone screen is 3 cm x 3 cm, which is much smaller than that of a computer screen. Just from the angle of information presentation, the small screen results in small output graphs, fonts, and few words, that may impair the coherence and comprehension of the message and impose cognitive load on the user (Brewster & Murray, 2000)[5]. Cell phones, moreover, do not allow for whole page or whole line scrolling as allowed in larger screen devices. Kim and Albers (2003)[6] investigated factors influencing the reading efficiency of a table displayed on a small screen and found that too many words in one line im- paired users’ ability to search for information. Findings by Sandfeld and Jensen’s (2005)[7] indicated that decreasing letter and target size impaired task performance; that is, participants did worse with small targets than they did with large ones in the same task. However, research by Chen and Chien (2005)[8] indicated that font and font size had no effect on reading efficiency. They found that how the information was displayed and the speed in which it was displayed affected comprehension of a given message. However, not all researches indicated that presentation on small screens impaired reading efficiency. For example, Dillon, Richardson, and McKnight (1990) [9]found that although fewer lines of words could be displayed on a small screen as opposed to a larger one, no significant differences in reading and understanding effects of infor- mation were found. Laarni (2002)[10] contrasted three kinds of small screen palmtop mobile devices, PDA, email devices and mobile phones, and found that on a 3 cm × 3 cm size screen, reading efficiency was not impaired when 15 letters were displayed on one line, and that the efficiency was improved when the information was scrolled gradually as compared to when a whole page was scrolled at once. Melchior (2001)[11] showed that use of a wiping design (wiping alludes to the action of a windscreen wiper), whereby content to be scrolled off a screen was dimmed, helped users maintain the context of content presented on a small screen. Shieh, Hsu, and Liu (2005) [12] also found that a pre-guiding presentation style combined with space be- tween words helped promoting reading efficiency and speed of content on a small screen. Another factor linked to the ease of reading text on a small screen is the color of the font and the background (Wang, Chen, & Chen, 2002)[13]. Research in our lab (Zhang et al., 2004)[14] found that comparable small font size on text and icons and green fonts presented on bright blue background enhanced efficiency in reading among Chinese users. Clearly, the design of a cell phone’s interface must allow for multi-tasking and easy operation (Dong, Wang, & Dai, 1999; Duchamp, 1991)[15]. This issue looms larger as the functions of cell phones have expanded to include surfing the internet and sending and receiving emails. Thus, interfaces should be designed to maximize the users’ ability to control it, to minimize the user’s cognitive load, and to maintain the consistency of the interface (Chen, 2001)[16]. Three interface design types also need to be considered: framework, interaction, and visual elements which, as relevant to the research reported below, include color, font, and page format. . learning object ontology is under improving. Based this learning object ontology we can enjoy many benefits: the sharing common understanding of the information structure in domain; enabling. title slot is a string. That is, name is a slot with value type String. Part of the slots are showed in Fig.2. 4.2.4 Instances Creating individual instances of classes in the hierarchy is. example, China had 140 million cell-phone users in 2001 (McMillan, 2001)[1], over 300 mil- lion in 2004 (Dan, 2004)[2] According to recent reports internally (Ministry of In- formation Industry