Talk:AR Discovery Scenarios/@comment-406569-20150504194654/@comment-26092930-20150507131849

This is exactly what I try to abstract. In order to clarify my reasoning I added the context identification as a separate step to clarify that. So for a given use case we can isolate the different layers in order to shape the characteristics of a scenario.

For example, in an expanded Kurio example the users can choose between guided tours and explorations for adults, families or children. This would provide a very basic user context. Then during the visit, smart beacons inform the tangible on the locaiton within the exhibition. From these smart beacons the tangibles may request additional information (e.g., to inform whether members of another visiting group were there in order to create a collaborative game). The state of such a group activity would be a shared state between the beacons and the tangibles.

The same use case could be implemented in a different scenario in which wireless triangulation inform the tangibles about their location within the exhibition but a museum WiFi network provides connectivity to a central server that stores the states of the different groups. This change influences the context identification and the information delivery methods and protocols, but not necessarily the information packaging or the information filtering.

If you take the same use case to an outdoor exhibition, the context identification can be implemented via GPS and the delivery done via cellular data channels. This would change the sensor requirements of the tangibles. Similarly, the replacement of the tangibles with smart phones would change the scenario.

You can go further and change the use case but keeping the scenario. E.g. by replacing a family visit with a group of history students from a university and thus chaning the recreative to an educational/professional context. This might influence the information filtering but not necessarily the context identification, information packaging and filtering.