A few hours before leaving for Denmark. Last few chances to gather my thoughts on the subject.
I feel excited on one side, empty (as if everything has been already said) on the other, challenged (as actually the topic is soo huge) on yet another (at least we know I'm more than bidimensional).
What follows is just a collection of freeform thoughts and conjectures. Please take them for what they are. But, as usual, conversation is more than welcome.
Anyway, here we are: hypertexts.
They hold Process.
They hold Structure.
They also meet the Social, where the non linear nature of both structure and process justify the active participation of the user in the editing process.
Media Affordance
To go one step further, we have that hypertexts are a kind of multidimensional written word that utterly breaks the concept/limit of sequentiality, characteristic of printed media, and that is culturally associated with the visualization of the phonetic alphabet. Therefore we have an interesting overlapping here between affordance of the text and hypertext media.From visual to auditory media
In breaking the sequentiality of the printed media, hypertexts also reconnect with the oral tradition and theatre.Learning experience
Hypertext and hypermedia also rise the complexity of the cultural experience by one degree, as every concept can be investigated independently from all others and in this detaches even from oral transmission: there is no more "story" or, better, the story is no more unique, but instead we have N! stories, or the permutations of all possible paths. Problem is, due to how we are used to think and "dose" our attention, the outcome will be probably different based on which specific path is chosen.This can be ok in a personal development context, but takes on a total new perspective when efficiency and productivity parameters start to be taken into account.
User experience
Let's have a look at possible hypertextual user experiences:1. one start - one end. Self contained experiences. Certain immersive art installations, labyrinths and most museums, allow this kind of approach. Same thing applies to some videogames, where the beginning and the end of the story are fixed, but the game can develop along different different lines. Moreover, the first "artistic" hypertext I ever experienced was of this kind (sadly I don't have the references here, they're in Italy).
2. one start - many endings. This is the typical GameBook approach.
3. random starts - one end. This is maybe the ideal knowledge management grail(?)... really easy to obtain when the information sought and the system are both simple and well defined (yellow pages), very hard when they are heterogeneous (internet search).
4. random access - multiple ending. Wikipedia type: you choose how deep to go.
Is this all? Actually not. We just considered the structure of the experience but not its process.
so the process too can be either linear or hypertextual.
And combining process and structure, we find that:
- A linear process from a single start can only lead to a single end, for any given instance of the experience, that is, given a certain context; under different context/circumstances, we can expect the user to explore a different path.
- A hypertextual approach from a fixed start can lead to a multiple end or to a single end (depending on the structure).
- A linear process in a random access structure can, depending on the structure, reach multiple or single endings (though in this case through different paths).
- Finally a hypertext approach from a multiple start will lead to a single or multiple result.
Sounds a little like predicate logic, doesn't it?
Have a great talk my friend!