I've entered the information by hand (ie, all size, references, and links are not guaranteed to be correct.) Information contained in the audience, relevance, and abstract fields are all personal opinions, and I hope that they will be more useful than offending. (A low relevance does not mean low quality.) Where two labels appear in the "Relevance" category, the first is the primary, so medium-low is more relevant than low-medium. I haven't read all of the papers yet (particularly those without the meta-data entered), but hope to soon. If you'd like to contribute to the bibliography, please do so! You can either send me pointers to relevant papers, or complete entries with metadata. If you want to add an opposing viewpoint or another abstract or rating to an existing entry, mail that to me also at ketchpel@cs.stanford.edu. Thanks to Interactive Multimedia Association. and Texas A&M University, Hypermedia Research Laboratory Advanced Technology Group of the Washington University School of Medicine Library Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, Inc., University of Michigan's Journal of Electronic Publishing, AAAI Spring Symposium '95 on Information Gathering, DAGS '95, DL '94, ADL '95, DL '95. Also, to Andreas Paepcke for InterBib, which generates HTML bibliographies from BibTeX.
