Dr Kathy Lynch [HREF1], Senior Lecturer, Caulfield School of IT, Faculty of IT [HREF2], PO Box 197, Monash University [HREF3], Victoria, 3145. Kathy.Lynch@infotech.monash.edu.au
Dr Heather Bowe, [HREF4] Senior Lecturer, School of Languages, Cultures & Linguistics, Faculty of Arts, PO Box 3A, Monash University [HREF3], Victoria, 3800. Heather.Bowe@arts.monash.edu.au
In this paper we discuss the development of the Indigenous Language of Victoria – Resource Portal (ILV-RP) [HREF5]; a resource with the aim to be an entry point to resources for Victorian Indigenous languages for a number of user groups - researchers, teachers, Indigenous persons, and students: All looking at the same content but through different lenses.
We describe the role web portals play in information access, and present an argument for their use in this project. We share our experiences in developing a web portal to meet the needs of a diverse group of users, as well as the results of a series of usability studies conducted to refine the user requirements and improve the usability of the portal.
A portal is a single access point to information sources, therefore making available these resources to a larger community than otherwise possible. The use of information technology in the development of a portal has the potential to give a two dimensional (depth and breadth) access to these resources: Depth in so much as complete texts (articles, transcripts, recordings); and breadth in access to both academic and historical texts. One of the primary concerns in designing a successful portal is knowing who the target audience is, or more importantly, how they use the portal? This paper examines users' perspectives of the usefulness of a resource portal to house or link to academic and historical resources for Indigenous languages of Victoria – in particular the Yorta Yorta language.
Written records of Victorian Indigenous languages include language resources gathered in the 18 th and early 19 th centuries by government officials and interested private citizens. Some material was published at the time it was collected and is available in reference collections of major libraries. Other material is only available in manuscript sources in research libraries and/or on microfiche. In the last fifty years linguists have analysed such material, producing overview classifications in the first instance. Linguists, including Blake (1991, 1998, 2003a,b), Blake and Reid (1998, 1999, 2002), Bowe, Peeler and Atkinson (1997), Bowe and Morey (1999), Krishna-Pillay (1996) and Fesl (1985) have published basic analyses of much of the available material.
Recently, there has been a resurgence of interest by the Victorian Indigenous people in their language heritage, as they assert their Indigenous identity as emerging writers, playwrights, educators and scholars. The Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority has responded to this interest by developing a new VCE Study Design – Indigenous Languages of Victoria: Revival and Reclamation which requires students to learn where to find historical sources for Victorian Indigenous languages and acquire skills in analysing such materials as part of the language reclamation process. Access to key historical sources for Victorian Indigenous languages is thus a crucial part of the implementation for this newly accredited VCE study.
Research in Linguistics, particularly on endangered languages, has recently evolved to require not only language analysis, but the systematic documentation of the linguistic resources on which the analysis is based. Recent worldwide initiatives have focused on the digitisation, preservation and provision of wider access to such documentary materials, including previously collected materials and those concerned with languages which are no longer in regular use but are related to currently endangered languages (eg. Austin, 2003; Bird & Simonds, 2003).
Work on endangered languages, and the process of language reclamation ideally requires the collaboration of intergenerational teams of Indigenous people interested in language, who can draw on the resources of the non-Indigenous academic community.
The ILV-RP pilot site was designed to respond to the need for a portal suitable for a number of user groups; primarily: researchers, teachers, Indigenous person, and students; all looking at the same content but for different reasons and through different lenses.
The portal needs to provide access to:
In developing any resource to be used by multiple user types, to use and obtain the maximum potential of the resource, a clear understanding is required of the issues that need to be addressed prior to the development of the resource. In the case of developing a web portal for users by multiple uses within an Indigenous language arena, the following were of high importance: non-standard spelling, language names, access and access rights to particular resources, and readability of the English language on the site.
One of the key issues when dealing with language material from groups with no written tradition, is that each recorder represented the spoken forms they heard using whatever written conventions seemed appropriate to them. Although most of the recorders who worked on the languages of Victoria were speakers of English, some of them also had familiarity with other European languages, and a few had familiarity with the emerging tradition of philology. Consequently the orthographic representation (spelling) of the words varied greatly from individual to individual.
Modern linguists, who work with this historical data need to draw on their knowledge of the sound systems of Australian Indigenous languages, and the range of conventions likely to have been used, and analyse the material by first collecting all representations of the same word for a given language, and then reconstituting what they analyse the spoken word to have been. This can then represent these words using the International Phonetic Alphabet, or a spelling more like that used for the names of Indigenous groups, and landmarks i.e., group names such as Pitjantjatjara, Warlpiri, Yolngu and place names such as Uluru, Yirrakala, Kakadu.
It is essential that non-specialists working with historic material understand that it needs to be interpreted in some way, and that this is best done by the cross-comparison of multiple sources for the same language.
Even the issue of what is the ‘same language' is also a product of analysis. Because Aboriginal Society was based on family clan groups, typically associated with a particular area, speakers may have identified their language using a local place affiliation eg Moiraduban ‘the people of the Moira lakes', or Gayilduban, the people of the Gayila river ( Lower Goulburn ). Alternatively, a different language group, might speak of the Gayilduban people as the Waaringillum ‘the people from the Waaring area.' Because it was customary for men to marry women from outside their own immediate group, many families would thus be multilingual or at least multidialectal. As a result, the linking of material from different sources needs also to involve analytic comparison, rather than a straightforward linking of language names as given in the historic sources.
One of the biggest challenges facing the portal design was how to package the historic materials, but also include a standardised practical orthography for each word, so that the apparent pronunciation of the word could be more readily evident to users of the site.
Given the range of potential users of the site, choosing a suitable level of language and a user-friendly presentation format was of concern.
The ever-growing development and innovative use of information technology has brought forth many avenues to improve management, access, and preservation of information, one such advancement is the development of web portals. A portal is an entry point or a gateway to ‘something'. A web portal is “an entry point to other websites, often by being or providing access to a search engine.” [HREF6]. Web portal growth began in the late 1990's and was in the domain of large companies, bringing with it an addition to the description of a web site “A web site or service that provides access to a number of sources of information and facilities, such as a directory of links to other web sites, search engines, email, online shopping, etc” [HREF7]. The development of web portals was in response to organisations wishing to maintain their web users' loyalty to their site, not to lose them to other sites, and a single access point to corporate information (see HREF8 for a comprehensive overview of web portal development). These days, web portals are prolific and are developed for large and small organisations, and individuals alike. A 2002 description of a web portal by Spyratos, Tzitzikas and Christophides, show the further development and expansion of web portals, “[web portals] aggregate and classify, in a semantically meaningful way, various information resources for diverse target audiences”.
A Google search ( 23 February, 2006 ) using the query ‘web portal' retrieved 275 million entries. These portals are published by large government organisations to small non-government and community organisations. Many of the non-government portals are a place for commonly interested people to access information, share ideas and be part of a community of similar minded people.
The use of web portals to access to Indigenous resources has been adopted by a number of organisations providing: A Google search using the keywords “indigenous portals” and searching ‘pages from Australia' resulted in 221,000 entries (23 February 2006); with the first one being Indigenous Portal [http://www.indigenous.gov.au/]. This portal claims to be “your window to resources, contacts, information, and government programs and services for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders”, and contains links to 13 (mainly government) web sites. It is interesting to note, that the Google results that follow contain sites that point to the Australian Indigenous Portal or to other government or education organisations. It is great to see these sites, and that the access to ‘official' resources is so visible, however, rarely do the sites contain the endangered language resources described above.
The use of a resource intense, web portal that also addresses the need for Australian, in particular Victorian, Indigenous language preservation is what seems to be missing.
In developing such a portal it is important to build a site knowing, if not using all, the success factors of user acceptance of a portal. Winkler (2001, [HREF9]) has identified a number of these factors. These are:
In the development of any web content, it is advisable to follow one of the proven development methodologies, or in this case, web development methodologies. Avison and Fitzgerald (1995) define methods for system development as “a set of phases which guide the developers in their choice of techniques that might be appropriate at each stage of the project”. These techniques help to plan, manage, control and evaluate information systems, of which web portals are one.
There are numerous methodologies used to develop web based systems, however, for the system developed during this study (ILV-RP), the method used was a combination of the Web Site Design Method (WSDM) developed by De Troyer and Leune (1998, [HREF10]) and the engineering approach developed by Lowe and Hall (1999). WSDM uses a user-centred design approach where use-cases are used to determine the requirements of each user type to define the information objects based on the information requirements of the users.
The Lowe and Hall approach, amongst other requirements, suggests that a user-centred model be used, the data to be stored in a database, and the development to the web system is done in incremental steps.
Both models have a focus on user-centred design in the development of the ‘look and feel' of the site, and its navigation.
A user-centred, incremental interactive development process was used in the development of the ILV-RP to allow for small, manageable development steps. A number of forms of prototyping were used throughout the development of the ILV-RP, informing iterative development of the portal. The three stages of development focus on the conceptual development of the portal, to the development of a fully functional prototype. These stages are presented in Figure 1, with a summary of each stage in the sections below. The stages focus on:
The language focus of the ILV-RP is on all ten Indigenous language groups of Victoria , however, for the pilot, only the Yorta Yorta language of the Murray-Goulburn region in North East Victoria is contained in the pilot project.
The potential user groups of the portal were identified with reference to the collaborative approach to language reclamation outlined in the curriculum document for the Victorian Certificate of Education study - Indigenous languages of Victoria Revival and Reclamation, and were specified as researchers, teachers, Indigenous persons and students.
Once the user types were identified, user scenarios were developed; that is, what information would each user type be expected to retrieve, and anticipation on how their preference in method for viewing the information. Once this was established, descriptions or scenarios could be written on how a particular user group would be expected to use the portal.
Following this, a search for available texts was conducted. This included historical texts, including vocabulary lists, sketch grammars, sentences and phrases, transcribed and translated text; and archival audio material of songs, and spoken material in the languages. The most appropriate format to present the texts was also discussed and decided upon. Another issue that needed to be considered was the access and access rights. Access to restricted materials due to copyright, and access rights as related the appropriateness of certain material being available only to people with family ties to the particular language. The research of Hunter, Koopman, and Sledge (2003, [HREF11]) into the management of Indigenous access rights was explored, with the final decision for the pilot ILV-RP to have no restrictions on the texts in the first instance, however, to include information regarding rights and sensitive materials which the users are to accept before entering the portal. The wording of such, was based on the access rights for the WILD project of the NSW Aboriginal Languages Research and Resource Centre Database ( [HREF12]). For the purposes of the pilot, access to audio tapes was exemplified with one very short excerpt only, because the researchers felt that this material was likely to be regarded as needing restricted access.
The use of paper-based prototyping is common practice in the development of web based systems. An elaborate extension of paper-based prototyping is the PICTIVE (Plastic Interface for Collaborative Technology Initiatives through Video Exploration; Muller, 1991) technique. Preece et al (2002) describe this technique as using “low fidelity office items, such as sticky notes and pens, and a collection of design objects to investigate specific screen and window layouts for a system.” (Preece et al 2002 p. 307). A simplified PICTIVE technique was use with an Indigenous language linguist to develop a non-professional prototype with the aim of developing the basic structure of the portal. A paper-based prototype made up of A4 paper, sticky notes, and annotations was used to show (and develop) what the user would expect each menu item for example, to contain. This technique is particularly useful for solving problems such as menu hierarchies.
The sticky note prototype was transferred to a ‘grey screen' computer design to further explore the conceptual design of the portal. Grey screen prototyping is a rapid development process where sequential or interrelated screens without the use of colour and ‘gimmicks'. The intention of using grey screens is to reduce interference of colour and multimedia elements that often distract the user from the purpose of the evaluation.
Once the basic design and navigation were defined, an interactive computer-based prototype was developed (version Alpha 1). Standard HTML was used to develop the static site. The content of this prototype was minimal but broad enough to satisfy some of the basic requirements of the various user groups. More than one design concept was developed to establish the more appropriate interface. These prototypes were evaluated using a walkthrough strategy by two individuals who were representative of two of the user groups (research and teacher of Indigenous languages). The outcome of this evaluation was a refinement of navigation, graphics, and colour of the portal to produce ILV-RP version Alpha2. Images of two of the screens are presented in Figure 2 .
 -  |
|---|
ILV-RP (alpha2) underwent evaluation by representatives of one of the user groups (researchers); details of this evaluation are presented in the Results section. The outcome of the evaluation was further refinement of navigation, graphics, colours, and feedback on the texts that were (or were not) incorporated into next version (alpha3) of the portal. Images of two of the screens are presented in Figure 3.
 - |
|---|
The prototype was once again modified according to the previous evaluation to produce Beta 1 version of the ILV-RP; however the modifications this time included the use of an alternate technology to support the portal. The philosophy underpinning the technology of the portal was to make it easy to administer and make modifications and updates, plus be dynamic; therefore a database was critical in achieving these aims. Database technology would enable the prototype to flexible, have advanced functionality, be easy to maintain, and be compatible with other systems such as those being developed by the NSW Aboriginal Languages Research and Resource Centre . The database technology used was mySQL and PHP. These specifications were decided upon at the commencement of the project, however due to the complex nature of the design of the portal, it was decided by the development team to leave this additional complexity alone until the content, and look and feel were determined. (This version has yet to be evaluated by the user groups.)
In the design and development of any web site, it is important to design an interface that is useful and easy to access the information required by the user. Interfaces can help or hinder a user, and if there are multiple user groups, then the design of the interface is paramount. One of the key features in good design is knowing who your users are, and how they will use the site. One technique to evaluate the effectiveness of a site, and in particular during its development, is the conduction of a usability test or tests. This study reports on Stages 2-3 of the development process which was the development of the Beta version of the ILV-RP. Usability tests in varying formats were conducted three times during this critical stage of the portal's development. The results of the usability tests have been used as means of extracting data and feedback on the usefulness and ease of use of the ILV-RP web site.
Several usability tests were conducted to inform the designers on how well the initial design suited the identified user groups. The usability tests involved observing participants navigate the portal, the completion of a questionnaire or participation in a focus group session. The methods and the participant groups are presented in Table 1.
|
Version used |
Methods |
Participants |
Usability Test 1 |
Alpha 2 |
Observation, questionnaire, focus group |
university students studying Indigenous languages |
Usability Test 2 |
Alpha 3 |
Observation, questionnaire, focus group (2 sessions conducted) |
teachers of Indigenous languages, Indigenous persons, and students of Indigenous languages. |
It was determined that four identified user types would participate in the study; researchers of Indigenous languages, teachers of Indigenous languages, Indigenous persons, and students of Indigenous languages. The number of participants was small, however, it was deemed that much could be learned from small, focused and diverse participants. This is in tune with the usability literature, that states a small selective groups of users should uncover 80% of the usability issues that a larger number would uncover (Dumas & Redish, 1993). The participant types involved in the three usability tests are also presented in Table 1.
Three data instruments were used: Observation, questionnaire and focus group discussion (which were audio taped).
Observation: The participants were observed by the researchers during their use of the IVL-RP. Observation notes were taken by the project researchers. The participants were also asked to use a ‘think-write' protocol (as they work through the web portal, they can write down issues of concern) as prompts for the focus group session.
Questionnaire: The questionnaire was divided into eight sections: demographic data, general questions; graphics, layout of content, language used; navigation, ease of use; content. The responses were coded depending on the question as a point on a Likert-style or as a binary response eg Yes/No. The respondents also had the opportunity to add comments in each section. An excerpt of the questionnaire is presented in Table 2.
Overall comments: |
Yes |
No |
Comments |
The design of the interface is appealing |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
Generally the size of the text was easy to read |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
Generally the text was displayed in a way that was easy to read |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
It was easy to navigate through the site |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
The site was easy to use |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
All the information required was on the web site |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
Generally there was too much information on the screen |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
The language used was easy to understand |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
The graphics on the site are appealing |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
Exploring the site was frustrating. |
- 2 |
- 1 |
|
Focus group: Once the participants had completed the questionnaire they were asked if they would like to participate in a discussion of the ILV-RP. In this session, general to specific questions were used to probe issues that were not fully covered in the questionnaire. The focus group question guideline is presented in Table 3 .
1. General to specific probing questions, based on the following themes:
2. Specific themes:
3. Of the following, which method of using the interviews did you find most useful:
4. If you used the cue points in the written transcription to listen to the audio, would you like more or less cue points? 5. Comparative word list
|
The quantitative data collected from the questionnaire were input into a spreadsheet where preliminary analysis could be undertaken using techniques such as mean score, and standard deviation. The audio recording from the focus group sessions were not transcribed exactly but rather the dialogue was coded according to the focus group questions, however, key utterances were kept intact to support the findings.
There were two usability test conducted over a period of three months. After each test, the portal was modified according to feedback from the participants. Table 4 outlines the methods used in each of the usability tests and the number and type of participants.
There were two usability test conducted over a period of three months. After each test, the portal was modified according to feedback from the participants. Table 4 outlines the methods used in each of the usability tests and the number and type of participants.
|
Method |
Participants |
number |
Usability Test 1 |
Observation, questionnaire, focus group |
Researchers (university students) studying Indigenous languages |
5 |
|
|
Sub-total |
5 |
Usability Test 2 |
Observation, |
Researcher of Indigenous languages |
0 |
|
questionnaire, |
Teachers of Indigenous (or other LOTE) languages, |
4 |
|
focus group 2.1 |
Indigenous persons, |
1 |
|
|
students of Indigenous languages |
0 |
|
Focus group 2.2 |
Indigenous persons, who were also students of Indigenous languages. |
2 |
|
|
Sub-total |
7 |
|
|
TOTAL |
12 |
Overall, the participants came from the following groups:
Some participants fell into two groups, in particular, the groups of Indigenous persons and students learning an Indigenous language.
The first usability test was conducted with (student) researchers of Indigenous languages, to obtain feedback on the usability of the first computer-based prototype (version Alpha 2) for the ILV-RP. The users were all ‘very experienced' or ‘experienced' in using the Internet and in using academic and historical Indigenous resources, therefore, some of the possible literacy issues of the wider audience may have been masked. The participants' overall experience of the site was ‘interesting', as evidenced by a mean of 3.9, where 5 was ‘totally interesting' and 1 was ‘totally uninteresting', with very little variance between the responses. Findings of this test gave the developers an informed view as to the usefulness of the portal to the researcher user group. Table 5 presents an overview of the data from observing the participants as they navigated through the portal, from responses in the questionnaire, and from the focus group discussion.
|
Usability test 1 – comments |
Site ‘grabber' |
Front page graphics and colours |
Best features |
Audio, colour and design, access to the information, Comparative word list (dual language search, spelling) |
Worst feature/s |
Non-functioning links, Resource page too long |
Frustrations |
Slow loading of audio |
|
Small font |
|
Not all resources available |
|
Navigating to references |
|
Word list incomplete |
|
Resource page too long and complicated |
Wish list |
Grammatical explanations |
|
Phonetics information |
|
More multimedia |
|
Full interview audio |
Two key areas that became evident and a target for improvement were the incompleteness of the comparative word list, and the poor navigation on the resource page. These issues were the focus of the refinement for the Alpha 3 version. Other small changes were made in response to the feedback. A tribal map of Victoria was added to the site as this was seen by the content expert as an important resource for all user groups.
The second usability test involved participants from the remaining user groups identified ( teachers of Indigenous languages, Indigenous persons, and students). The participants used the Alpha 3 version of the ILV-RP. These users had various levels of experience using the Internet, and had ‘limited' to ‘some experience' in using academic and historical Indigenous resources. The participants overall experience of the site was ‘totally interested', evidenced by a mean of 5.0 with a negligible variance between the participants. Findings of this test gave the developers an informed view as to the usefulness of the portal to the various targeted user groups of the portal. The main comments expressed by these participants are presented in Table 6 .
|
Usability test 2 – comments |
Site ‘grabber' |
Tribal map of Victoria , Front page graphics and colours |
Best features |
All tribes named, cross-referencing, colour and design, audio |
Worst feature/s |
Too much different language information, |
Frustrations |
Low audio volume |
|
Resource incomplete |
|
Some of the word lists were too long |
|
Navigation to resources |
|
Incomplete word list, resources |
Suggestions |
Full search functionally, inclusion of grammar notes, |
|
More documents linked – either as pdf or images |
|
Photos of the contributing elders |
All participants indicated that they liked the opening page – its colour and imagery, with the repetitive comment that the web site portrayed its Australian Indigenous focus. In general users found the site of great interest, and a much needed resource, however, both usability tests revealed that users found that there was too much information on each page. Some, found the back links hard to find (being at the bottom of the page). One Indigenous user suggested that a skeleton site map with links be available down the left hand side.
Another Indigenous user was particularly concerned about the artwork of the main page being inappropriate because it is in the dot painting style of northern Australia : This is something that we need to address.
Many users, both Indigenous and non-indigenous, felt that the site should include more about grammar of the languages and include narrative and conversational data. Some even suggested that there should be room for input from current language reclamation programs, perhaps a linked chat room. It would seem that the original concept of the site being a research tool, rather than a people related reclamation site may need to be rethought. Information may need to be presented more in the style of Bowe, Peeler and Atkinson (1997), which starts out being very people oriented.
The design of the ILV-RP was iterative and followed a hybrid of the De Troyer and Leune (1997, HREF10), and the Lowe and Hall (1999) methodologies for web site development. The portal started from a paper-base prototype to develop the conceptual model of the portal, to a functional site through several computer-based prototypes informed through numerous usability tests conducted with specific identified user groups. Although the portals' development so far has only addressed the ‘search and navigation' success factor as outlined by Winkler (2001, HREF9), its value to the communities to which it has been targeted, is confirmed.
Design is critical to a portal's success; the more direct the involvement of the users in its design, the higher the chance of success. In the development of the ILV-RP, this has been achieved through a user-centred design involving people from the targeted user types in the development of the portal. Though the number of participants in the usability tests was small, their feedback informed changes in the prototype, and laid the foundations for a more robust, multi-lensed resource.
Different user groups brought forth different areas of comment: Researcher's comments focused on the resources themselves and ‘grateful' that the resources were visible, though at times hard to find, they also requested additional academic resources such as phonetics information. Whereas, the students and teachers of Indigenous languages comments focused on step –by-step location of resources with no distinction between the resource classification (academic or historical), they also requested more audio files and photographs. The comparative word list was a resource that all user types valued, though the additional information – the various spellings was seen more as long and unnecessary information by the students and teachers, but as a valuable addition by the researchers. This is an example of where the use of database technology to display the data incrementally for different user groups will be very beneficial (and fits in well with other Winkler's success factors of portal design). Comments by the Indigenous persons (some who were also students or teachers) included a focus on the Indigenous components of the site, for example the home page's representation of a map of Victoria, the use of an Emu graphic, and the inclusion of a map representing the Indigenous tribes of Victoria.
This shows that each user group looks at the site through different lenses, and therefore the design of the portal must take into close consideration these different views, in particular where ethical and cultural consideration are crucial.
An interesting aspect of this project was the process of our discussion with major libraries, concerning the possibility of them digitising and making available through their own websites, relevant archival materials so that our portal could link to them. Discussions with the National Library of Australia and the State Library of New South Wales are advanced, but the materials are not yet available on-line. However, discussions with the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) have progressed, with input from other linguists, so that the relevant parts of Curr 1887 are now on line through the main Library catalogue ([HREF13] more specifically, [HREF14] ). The AIATSIS library catalogue now has a link to the South Australian Museum where Norman Tindale's map of Tribal boundaries of Aboriginal Australia is available electronically ([HREF15], select Tribal Boundaries). Thus the AIATSIS library catalogue is not only now providing access to digital holdings of its own, but is incorporating a portal facility as well. We are pleased that our project has contributed to the development of policy and practice of major research libraries in the area of electronic access to holdings on Indigenous languages. These developments mean that portals such as the ILV-RP will be able to function increasingly as web portals and less as repositories as was necessary when we began our pilot.
This project has moved from a static idea, iterative design, to a portal that is now dynamic and adaptive that can be viewed through multiple lenses.
The authors would like to thank the Monash Faculties of Arts, and IT for funding the project. We would also like to thank the project's research assistants (Dr Julie Reid and Miss Lara Havlik) and project programmer (George Papdan) for their efforts and enthusiasm.
Austin, P. (ed) (2003). Language documentation and description, Vol 1. SOAS, University of London .
Avison D. and Fitzgerald G. (1995). Information systems development: methodologies, techniques and tools. Mc Graw-Hill.
Bird, S., and Simonds, G. (2003). Seven dimensions of portability of language documentation and description. Language 79:557-582
Blake, B. (1991). ‘Woiwurrung, The Melbourne Language', in Dixon , R.M.W. & B.J. Blake (eds.) The Handbook of Australian Languages, Volume 4 . Melbourne : Oxford University Press Australia .
Blake, B. (1998) (ed) Wathawurrung and the Colac language of Southern Victoria . Canberra : Pacific Linguistics
Blake, B. (2003a). ‘The Warrnambool language: A consolidated account of the Aboriginal language of the Warrnambool area of the western district of Victoria based on nineteenth century sources' . Canberra : Pacific Linguistics.
Blake, B. (2003b). 'The Bunganditj (Buwandik) language of the Mount Gambier Region'. Canberra : Pacific Linguistics.
Blake, B. and Reid, J. (1998). ‘Classifying Victorian Languages.' in Blake, Barry J. (ed). Wathawurrung and the Colac language of Southern Victoria . Canberra : Pacific Linguistics, pp1-58.
Blake, B. and Reid, J. (1999). ‘Pallanganmiddang: a language of the Upper Murray '. In Aboriginal History Vol 23:15-31.
Blake, B. and Reid, J. (2002). ‘The Dhudhuroa language of northeastern Victoria : a new description based on historical sources'. In Aboriginal History Vol 26:177-210.
Bowe, H., and Morey, S. (1999). Yorta Yorta (Bangerang) language of the Murray-Goulburn including Yabula Yabula. Canberra : Pacific Linguistics.
Bowe, H., Peeler, L., and Atkinson, S (1997). Yorta Yorta language heritage. Clayton: Monash University , Department of Linguistics.
De Troyer O. and Leune C. (1998). "WSDM: A User-Centered Design Method for Web Sites", In Computer Networks and ISDN systems, Proceedings of the 7th International World Wide Web Conference, pp. 85 - 94, Publ. Elsevier, Brisbane, Australia. Available online HREF10
Dumas, J., and Redish, J. (1993). A Practical guide to usability testing . Norwood , NJ : Ablex.
Fesl, E. (1985). Ganai - A Study of the Aboriginal Language of Gippsland based on 19th Century Materials. Masters Thesis, Linguistics Department, Monash University .
Hunter, J., Koopman, B. and Sledge, J. (2003). Software Tools for Indigenous Knowledge Management. Available online HREF11
Krishna-Pillay, S. (1996). Dictionary of Keeraywoorong and related dialects . Warnambool: Gunditjmara Aboriginal Cooperative.
Lowe D. and Hall W. (1999). Hypermedia & the Web: An engineering approach . John Wiley & Sons.
Muller, Michael J., Wildman, Daniel M., and White, Ellen A., (1991) "PICTIVE--An Exploration in Participatory Design," CHI '91 Conference Proceedings. Reading , MA : Addison-Wesley,
Preece, J., Rogers , Y., and Sharp, H. (2002). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction . New York , NY : John Wiley & Sons.
Spyratos, N., Tzitzikas, Y. and Christophides, V. (2002). On Personalizing the Catalogs of Web Portals - FLAIRS Conference.
Winkler, R. “Portals – The All In One Web Supersites: Features, Functions, Definitions, Taxonomy.” (2001). SAP Design Guild. Available online HREF9