| Literature DB >> 27441642 |
Greg J McInerny1,2.
Abstract
Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27441642 PMCID: PMC4956105 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004745
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Fig 1Branding needn’t be demanding.
The “Death of the Desktop” workshop (see: http://beyond.wallviz.dk/, https://vimeo.com/102527731) had a strong brand that was intriguing, evocative, and memorable. The twitter account (@visfutures) revealed information and contributions in the lead-up to the event. The brand helped to set a tone for the preworkshop submissions and the workshop activities. Consider how effective the brand would have been if the workshop was just called “Consequences of a concerted community focus on visualization technologies and the impact on interaction and display techniques.” Would this have been easy to remember or Google? Would this have set a theme that was easy to follow?
Fig 2Cabaret seating plans (also see [3]) can support different workshop activities.
A seating plan may help you distribute facilitators and rapporteurs (See Rule 3).
Fig 3Sketchnotes (http://www.flickr.com/photos/francisrowland/6944419112/lightbox/ | @francisrowland).