🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
> Our group is looking into multimedia, but we have found no good
> definition of what multimedia really is. Also the terms "hypermedia"
> and "hypertext" perhaps need defining properly.
> 
> Our current working definitions are:
> 
> MULTIMEDIA: Mixed media. In some way "integrated". Not necessarily 
> interactive. Media include text, graphics, animation, photographs, 
> video, and sound.

	Multimedia:  Multiple medias.  Systems with the capability to handle
any of the above mentioned media.

> HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via 
> associative links.

	Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not
have to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
internally structured.

> HYPERTEXT: Same as hypermedia, but text only.

	This is ok.  Hypertext is a specific subset of hypermedia.

> There are a couple of questions about these definitions:
> 
> 1. Should other media be included? If so what? 

	Sure.  Any "media" that conveys information/impressions such as
light shows, smells, motion (vibration/actual motion), etc.  Basically, use
all 5 (or 6 :-)) senses.

> 2. Many people say "multimedia" when they mean "hypermedia". Should
> we distinguish between these terms. Is non-interactive multimedia
> even interesting?

	Definitely make a distinction.  Non-interactive multimedia is
definitely interesting.  Consider a rock concert - lighting effects sync'd
with music, flash pots, moving stages, lasers, etc.

> 3. Are subjects like Virtual Reality (or Cyberspace) part of multimedia?

	Yes.  In fact, on January 21st, Intel Princeton had a VR demo using
DVI.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959

>2. Many people say "multimedia" when they mean "hypermedia". Should
>we distinguish between these terms. Is non-interactive multimedia
>even interesting?


"Multi" indicates quantity, "Hyper" indicates quality. In HyperMedia you
put several media together in such a terrific way, so the unity becomes a
new sort of medium: a HyperMedium.
 
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!

Just MHO...

    /Olle

In article <1991Feb5.140305.9957@cbnewsh.att.com> rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) writes:
>In article <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
>
>> HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via 
>> associative links.
>
>	Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not
>have to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
>occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
>internally structured.
>

How can these links be used if the media is not interactive? The
structure must be there for a reason, and that reason must surely be
that the hypermedia is intended for an end-user, and that the user
should navigate through the structure, and this must be through some
kind of interaction. I can't think of any counter-example to this,
though I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

I concede that media can be interactive but still not be hypermedia.
For example, a video player can be viewed and frozen, fast-forwarded,
rewound, etc.  There is interaction, but there are no associative
links involved.

>	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
>	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
>	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959


-- 
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

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

Marketing people decide on names; technologists create the things that
get named.  Until we have a larger repertoire of these things, any
finer distinctions in what we mean by each name is moot, IMHO.

-Ittai

>>>>> On 5 Feb 91 14:03:05 GMT, rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) said:

Kevin> Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not have
Kevin> to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
Kevin> occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
Kevin> internally structured.

and then...

Kevin> 	Definitely make a distinction.  Non-interactive multimedia is
Kevin> definitely interesting.  Consider a rock concert - lighting effects
Kevin> sync'd with music, flash pots, moving stages, lasers, etc.

Is the rock concert merely multimedia or does it also qualify as hypermedia?

--
====================================================================
David Masterson					Consilium, Inc.
(415) 691-6311					640 Clyde Ct.
uunet!cimshop!davidm				Mtn. View, CA  94043
====================================================================
"If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"

In article <1991Feb06.095148.27736@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
> In article <1991Feb5.140305.9957@cbnewsh.att.com> rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) writes:
> >In article <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
> >
> >> HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via 
> >> associative links.
> >
> >	Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not
> >have to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
> >occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
> >internally structured.
> >
> 
> How can these links be used if the media is not interactive? The
> structure must be there for a reason, and that reason must surely be
> that the hypermedia is intended for an end-user, and that the user
> should navigate through the structure, and this must be through some
> kind of interaction. I can't think of any counter-example to this,
> though I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

	Why should the user be required to navigate through the links?
Suppose I had a very large database.  It could take me hours to search
through it to find the snippet of information that I want.  It would be
much easier for a "ferret" program to do the searching for me.  An excellent
example can be found in the book _Earth_ by David Brin.  The book is
science fiction, but presents a very plausible scenario where the "net"
extends just about *everywhere* and the amount of information accessible
was so great that special purpose programs were needed to retrieve data.

	I can see that this net and others are evolving in this direction,
and as the bandwidth increases, users won't either want to or have the time
to do the searches manually.  They will want to say 'just get me this or
that' be it a single datum, a series of articles, film clips, etc.  That
is why hypermedia need not be interactive.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959

In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.91Feb6143524@cimshop3.uunet.UU.NET>, cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes:
> >>>>> On 5 Feb 91 14:03:05 GMT, rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) said:
> 
> Kevin> Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not have
> Kevin> to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
> Kevin> occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
> Kevin> internally structured.
> 
> and then...
> 
> Kevin> 	Definitely make a distinction.  Non-interactive multimedia is
> Kevin> definitely interesting.  Consider a rock concert - lighting effects
> Kevin> sync'd with music, flash pots, moving stages, lasers, etc.
> 
> Is the rock concert merely multimedia or does it also qualify as hypermedia?

	I don't think rock concerts qualify as hypermedia.  I think of
hypermedia as media linked together so that they can be retrieved via a hyper
access method.  Rock concerts are non-interactive multimedia presentations.
Non-interactive because the concert goers cannot change the scripted and
coordinated events/special effects (that's not to say that there isn't any
feedback between the musicians and the audience, though).

-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
	R. Kevin Laux				Email: rkl1@hound.att.com
	AT&T Bell Labs				Voice: (908) 949-1160
	Holmdel, NJ 07733			Fax:   (908) 949-0959

In <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se> nick@abblund.se writes:

>Our group is looking into multimedia, but we have found no good
>definition of what multimedia really is. Also the terms "hypermedia"
>and "hypertext" perhaps need defining properly.

As a Computer Science PhD student studying hypertext, I've ended up
with the following (rather cynical) definitions from observing
"the literature".

Hypertext:	a CS research assistant publishes a paper containing the
		words "See Section 4"
Multimedia:	a CS research assistant publishes a paper with colour photos
HyperMedia	a CS research assistant publishes a paper containing the
		words "See photo 4"
-- 
L.Carr@ecs.soton.ac.uk               Les Carr
Tel: +44 703 593649                  Dept of Electronics and Computer Science
Fax: +44 703 593045                  University of Southampton SO9 5NH England

In article <1991Feb7.143917.16336@cbnewsh.att.com> rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) writes:
>In article <1991Feb06.095148.27736@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
>> In article <1991Feb5.140305.9957@cbnewsh.att.com> rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) writes:
>> >In article <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se>, nick@abblund.se writes:
>> >
>> >> HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via 
>> >> associative links.
>> >
>> >	Hypermedia is a method of linking/organizing media.  It does not
>> >have to interactive.  Interactive should describe the relationship that
>> >occurs between the user and the application, not how the application is
>> >internally structured.
>> >

I've managed to find a definition of hypertext by the originator of the
word, Ted Nelson.

From "Literary Machines 90.1", Theodore Holm Nelson:

- HYPERTEXT DEFINED
-
- By hypertext I simply mean non-sequential writing. A magazine layout,
- with sequential text and inset illustrations and boxes, is thus
- hypertext. So is the front page of a newspaper, and so are various
- programmed books now seen on the drugstore stands (where you make a
- choice at the end of a page, and are directed to other specific
- pages).
-
- Computers are not intrinsically involved with the hypertext concept.
- But computers WILL be involved in every way, and in systems of every
- style.

I guess that wraps up that argument. Hypertext (and by implication,
hypermedia) does not have to be interactive.

Another point - hypertext is not just text, it is pictures too. I
haven't managed to find a rigorous definition of the difference
between hypertext and hypermedia yet, though. Is hypertext anything
that can be printed? Is it any media without a time dimension? Can
hypertext include holograms?

Something else which I've wondered about: Does hypermedia have to be
multimedia? Take for example the case of hypertext, with text only for
the sake of this argument. It is definitely a subset of hypermedia (it
is hyper, and it uses the medium of text). But there's only one
medium, so it's not multimedia. Or does the definition of multimedia
include the case of only a single medium?

-- 
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

From article <1991Feb04.124036.340@abblund.se>, by nick@abblund.se:
> Our group is looking into multimedia, but we have found no good
> definition of what multimedia really is. Also the terms "hypermedia"
> and "hypertext" perhaps need defining properly.
> 
> Our current working definitions are:
> 
> MULTIMEDIA: Mixed media. In some way "integrated". Not necessarily 
> interactive. Media include text, graphics, animation, photographs, 
> video, and sound.

Multimedia standartization is discussed in relations to APIs, compression
algorithms, and file interchange formats for still pictures (e.g. JPEG),
full-motion video (e.g. DVI, MPEG), audio (nothing? Microsoft's WAVE ?),
animation (nothing? MicroMind?), and compound documents (MO:DCA, CDA,
both supersets of ODA, and HyTime). The latter topic is commonly
referred to as HYPERMEDIA. Individual medias, therefore, together
constitute a multimedia - "many medias". "Mixed medias" constitute
a hypermedia. For example, one of the concerns of hypermedia is
time synchronization. Hypermedia, therefore, is one of the
most important (and interesting ?) multimedia discussions, we do,
however, have things to discuss in multimedia besides hypermedia.

> 
> HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via 
> associative links.
> 
Almost, but a bit too narrow. It is a general subject of relations
between multimedia objects.

> HYPERTEXT: Same as hypermedia, but text only.
> 
Agree.

> There are a couple of questions about these definitions:
> 
> 1. Should other media be included? If so what? 
> 
Absolutely, as long as it may contribute to a _practical_
discussion of the subject.

> 2. Many people say "multimedia" when they mean "hypermedia". Should
> we distinguish between these terms. Is non-interactive multimedia
> even interesting?

Multimedia as a subject is a superset of hypermedia as a subject.
Hypermedia, however, is the main motivator of the present interest
in multimedia. For example, a (silent) TV window on your SPARC
is a multimedia but not a hypermedia issue. Adding an audio
comment to a text is a hypermedia (and multimedia) issue.

> 
> 3. Are subjects like Virtual Reality (or Cyberspace) part of multimedia?


They may be.

> 
> Does anyone know of better definitions, or would anyone like to try
> to define them? 
> 
Nope.

In article <3004@sodium.ATT.COM> esg@sodium.ATT.COM (Edward Gokhman) writes:

>Individual medias, therefore, together
>constitute a multimedia - "many medias". "Mixed medias" constitute
>a hypermedia. For example, one of the concerns of hypermedia is
>time synchronization. 

I would say that time synchronization can be a concern of multimedia, too.
For example, a rock concert with synchronized fireworks, or a slide
show with synchronized music, are both multimedia but not hypermedia.


-- 
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