across the City of Lancaster. Visitors linked with an information model of the city
using hand-held context-aware tourist guides. GUIDE used a cell-based 802.11 wire-
less LAN, covering the major tourist areas, to provide both positioning information
and deliver static and dynamic information to the mobile devices [10].
Imogl is a mobile guide that was deployed in two Belgian museums. Luyten and
Coninx [11] noted that in a museum setting, location has to be determined as prox-
imity to the nearest artefact because museum artefacts, although largely static, are apt
to be moved around over time. As the museums in questions both had outdoor ele-
ments, GPS was used to identify objects outdoors. However, as GPS can’t be used
indoors, Bluetooth was used instead. It is interesting to note that the authors identi-
fied that one of the main problems with Bluetooth in a museum setting is that its
communication range is too wide, suggesting IrDA as the likely best alternative.
Shih-Chun Chou et al in their 2005 paper [12] introduce us to a set of visitor-
oriented services which uses a semantic web rule reasoning engine (SWRE) to iden-
tify relevant sources of contextual information. This work is part of a collaboration
between Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh and the Institute for Information
Industry in Taiwan building on top of a comprehensive piece of work called the My-
Campus project [13, 14]. These services include exhibit recommendations, directions
to exhibits, people locator services and a rating application to share thoughts and
comments with other people. A user profile is built up at the start of the tour by get-
ting visitors to fill out a questionnaire. These user and privacy preferences are then
set in a semantic e-Wallet assigned to the user in order to tailor services accordingly.
Unfortunately this work is comprehensive but beyond our scope. A more useful
resource is that by Raptis et al who provide a review and comparison of other mobile
applications used within museum environments [15]. They also introduce a new
theoretical framework of context, which given that they concur with the view that
context is poorly defined seems counter-intuitive. Context is defined in four different
dimensions : the system, infrastructure, domain and physical contexts. It could be
argued that the first two of these relate directly to the software development cycle,
whereas the latter two are variations of identity, location and activity. Nevertheless
Raptis et al make a number of practical and salient points which are particularly ap-
plicable to museums. For example, in respect of observed museum visitor behaviour,
the most important factor affecting the interaction was felt to be the content itself and
not the technology, probably best summed up by the phrase “content is king”. An-
other important point made was the need to inform the user when something excep-
tional has occurred and give sensible instructions. This paper also includes a com-
parison of the technologies that affect the system context. It is interesting to note that
of the 12 systems reviewed, 11 of them opted for IrDA as their tagging solution and
that the other Imogl later moved from Bluetooth to IrDA.
5 Tagging Solutions
The mi-Guide application will be delivered in the first instance via PDAs, although at
a later date other devices may come into play. The basic idea is that exhibit informa-
tion is pulled onto the user’s device as the user approaches. In order to achieve this,
47