 |
 |
I'd like to pick up a thread from Cornelius Holtorfs posting in which it is stated snip...>They certainly never questioned (in writing--which is all I can go by) the idea of a non-linear argument as such.< snip I am concerned about this. To my way of thinking an arguement can *only* be linear in form if it is to serve the purpose of an academic thesis. I would argue that this purpose is to sustain the cycle from hypothesis/theory to observation/ experiment and back to a reviewed hypothesis (or a conclusion 'quod erat demonstrandum'). Non linear- or hyper-text certainly is useful for facilitationg exploration of a subject, or the effective presentation of a large volume of digital material, but to be effective there must be a thread running through it that says 'this is the material I worked with...this is my arguement...this is my conclusion'. At each stage, perhaps, hyperlinks can divert the reader into examining the material in their own way, and to their required depth of detail, but there must always be a point where they are dragged back to the arguement/thread. I'd be happy to hear what other subscribers think about this. In posting this I must confess that, as I do not have WWW access, but only email, I have not been able to read in detail the documents referred to. Can I put in a plea to list members to put more into their emails than links to web pages? Edmund Lee English Heritage Data Standards Unit %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%