Interestingly I received a questionnaire through this morning from a
student about the use of 'Virtual reality' displays in one of our
museums. This is how it was defined:
For this study, virtual reality can be 2D or 3D visualisations or only
realised through sound. It can be the imagined representation of
physical remains such as a scale model, or the entirely factual analysis
of 2D patterns such as on maps. It can include audio guides which
transport the visitor to another place and time. Computer simulations
are also part of virtual reality.
To me that seems like something altogether different from what I would
class as Virtual Reality, and is in fact really interpretive displays.
I wonder what anyone else thinks on this, and whether this has come from
lectures at University, or through a general misunderstanding of the
term?
Peter
DISCLAIMER:
This email and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is intended solely for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient please destroy or delete the content of this message immediately and notify the sender by reply email. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that does not relate to the official business of Canterbury City Council shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the Council.
This message has been checked for all known viruses.
**************************************************
For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
**************************************************
|