Peter Bøgh Andersen



Mobile and context-aware technology enables new activity-centred ways of using digital technology that require systematic methods for representing actions and activities computationally. The paper uses findings from ethnography, linguistics and philosophy to paint a generic portrait of activities, and suggests ways of representing it in an object-oriented framework. The paper makes a sharp distinction between the representation and the represented. The representations are not activities, they only represent them.


  1. Andersen, P. Bøgh, 2001. Maritime Work and Communication. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 8(2): 83-102
  2. Andersen, P. Bøgh, 2004. Anticipated Activities in Maritime Work, Process Control, and Business Processes. In K. Liu (ed.), Virtual, Distributed and Flexible Organizations. Studies in Organizational Semiotics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 35-60.
  3. Andersen, P. Bøgh. 2006. Activity based design. European Journal of Information Systems 15(2), 9-25
  4. Baekgård, L., 2006. Interaction in Information Systems - beyond human computer interaction. Proceedings of ALOIS 2006. 257-272. Borås, Sweden: University college of Borås.
  5. Bardram, J. E. & C. Bossen, 2005. Mobility Work -- The Spatial Dimension of Collaboration at a Hospital. Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(2), 131-160.
  6. Bardram, J. E., 2006. From Desktop Task Management to Ubiquitous Activity-Based Computing. In Victor Kaptelinin and Mary Czerwinski (eds.), Integrated Digital Work Environments: Beyond the Desktop Metaphor. Cambr., Mass: MIT Press.
  7. Bødker, S. & P. Bøgh Andersen, 2005. Complex Mediation. Human-Computer Interaction. (20), 353-402.
  8. Bødker, S., 1996. Understanding computer applications in use. In: Holmquist et al., (eds), Signs of Work. Berlin: de Gruyter, 325 -348.
  9. Fillmore, Ch. J., 1968. The case for case. In: E. Bach & R.T. Harms (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory. London, New York, Sydney, Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1-90.
  10. Fillmore, Ch. J., 1977. The case for case reopened. In P. Cole and G. M. Sadock (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: 8. Grammatical Relations. New York: Academic Press, 59-81.
  11. Goldkuhl, G. & A. Röstlinger, 2006. Context in focus: transaction and infrastructure in workpractices. Proceedings of ALOIS 2006, 41-57. University college of Borås: Borås, Sweden. pageId=317.
  12. Halliday, M. A. K., 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
  13. Halpin, T., 1996. Business Rules and Object Role Modeling. Database Programming & Design, vol. 9, no. 10, 66-72. Retrieved March 1 2007 from overview.html.
  14. Halpin, T., 1998. Object Role Modeling (ORM/NIAM). In: Bernus, P., Mertins, K. & Schmidt, G. (eds.), Handbook on Architectures of Information Systems, Springer. Retrieved March 1 2007 from http://www.
  15. Johnson, M., 1992. The body in the mind. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
  16. Jurafsky, D. & J. H. Martin, 2000. Speech and Language Processing. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
  17. Kristensen, B. B., 2002. Associative Modeling and Programming. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Object-Oriented Information Systems (OOIS'2002), Montpellier, France, 2002
  18. Kristensen, B. B., 2003. Associations: abstractions over collaboration. Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man & Cybernetics, Washington, D.C., USA, 2003.
  19. Lind, M., 1994. Modeling Goals and Functions of Complex Industrial Plants. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence, 8, 259-283
  20. Liu, K., 2000. Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Moran, T., 2005. Unified Activity Management: Explicitly Representing Activity in Work-Support Systems. ECSCW 2005 (European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work) Workshop on Activity: From a Theoretical to a Computational Construct. Paris, September 20, 2005
  22. Noreen, A, 1903-1923. Vårt Språk, vol. 1-7. Lund: Gleerup.
  23. Parunak, H. Van Dyke, 1995. Case grammar: a linguistic tool for engineering agent-based systems. Retreived March 1 2007 from parunakv/casegram.pdf
  24. Rittgen, P. 2006. Towards a language for business action theory. Proceedings of ALOIS 2006, 3-16. University college of Borås: Borås, Sweden. ?pageId=317.
  25. Ryan, M-L., 1991. Possible Worlds, Artificial Intelligence and Narrative Theory. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
  26. Searle, J., 1994. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Sowa, J. F., 2000. Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks Cole Publishing Co.
  28. Valin, Van R. D. & R. J. Lapolla, 1997. Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Vendler, Z., 1957. Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review. 143-160.
  30. Vendler, Z., 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press.
  31. Vygotsky, L.S., 1962. Thought and Language, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Bøgh Andersen P. (2007). COMPUTATIONAL REPRESENTATIONS OF ACTIVITIES . In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS, ISBN 978-972-8865-90-0, pages 95-104. DOI: 10.5220/0002347600950104

in Bibtex Style

author={Peter Bøgh Andersen},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,
SN - 978-972-8865-90-0
AU - Bøgh Andersen P.
PY - 2007
SP - 95
EP - 104
DO - 10.5220/0002347600950104