🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Feb5.213449.3180@sics.se> ollef@sics.se (Olle Furberg) writes:
> 
>Sound-film is an example of a HYPERmedium: Two different media, phonography
>and cinema, make a new medium. Note that cinema (and TV) is non-interactive!
>
>A typical example of MULTImedia is all these live music conserts with
>lasers, fireworks, computer aided animation, etc. etc. (Thinking esp. of 
>Jean-Michel Jarre's concert, 14 July in Paris). These conserts are neither
>hyper nor interactive, but impressive!
>

You seem to be saying that the difference between multimedia and hypermedia
is simply that hypermedia is *integrated*. I disagree. 

First of all, perhaps we need to define integration. I think we should
define integrated media as media that are SYNCHRONIZED with each
other.  I think the accuracy of synchronization is flexible as
appropriate to the media. For example, in the case of Jean-Michel
Jarre's fireworks, they should go off during the concert, and not when
everyone has gone home!

I think that both multimedia and hypermedia are ALWAYS synchronized.

I think the difference between the two is that hypermedia is structured
so that the consumer of the media can follow ASSOCIATIVE LINKS.

Multimedia has no associative links, and essentially runs from the
beginning to the end. 

That makes sound-film into plain old multimedia. And if Jean-Michel
asks his audience for requests, that turns his concert into
hypermedia!

On the other hand, perhaps you meant that hypermedia is several
media STORED together (on a roll of film, in your sound-film example),
whereas multimedia is in some sense LIVE? In which case I still 
disagree with you.

- Nick

-- 
Nick Hoggard                                   Phone: + 46 46 168524
Man-Machine Communication Lab                  Fax:   + 46 46 145620
ABB Corporate Research, Dept KLL               Email: nick@abblund.se
Ideon Research Park, Ole Roemers vaeg 5, S-223 70 Lund, Sweden