nick@abblund.se (02/04/91)
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. HYPERMEDIA: Same as multimedia but interactive. Interaction is via associative links. HYPERTEXT: Same as hypermedia, but text only. There are a couple of questions about these definitions: 1. Should other media be included? If so what? 2. Many people say "multimedia" when they mean "hypermedia". Should we distinguish between these terms. Is non-interactive multimedia even interesting? 3. Are subjects like Virtual Reality (or Cyberspace) part of multimedia? Does anyone know of better definitions, or would anyone like to try to define them? -- 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
rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) (02/05/91)
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
ollef@sics.se (Olle Furberg) (02/06/91)
>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
nick@abblund.se (02/06/91)
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
nick@abblund.se (02/06/91)
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
ittai@shemesh.GBA.NYU.EDU (Ittai Hershman) (02/07/91)
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
davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) (02/07/91)
>>>>> 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!"rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) (02/07/91)
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
rkl@cbnewsh.att.com (kevin.laux) (02/07/91)
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
lac@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Les Carr) (02/07/91)
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
nick@abblund.se (02/08/91)
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
esg@sodium.ATT.COM (Edward Gokhman) (02/09/91)
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.
nick@abblund.se (02/12/91)
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
masinter@parc.xerox.com (Larry Masinter) (02/20/91)
You'll be happier with your definitions of these terms if you think of them as descriptive adjectives instead of categories. There are matters of degree, just as with "interactive" or "colorful". While there are categories (non-interactive vs. some interaction, no colors vs. some color), we soon learn that there are poor uses of any medium: awkward interactions, confusing colors, poor choices of fonts, and misuses of multi- or hyper- media. -- Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com) Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) 3333 Coyote Hill Road; Palo Alto, CA USA 94304 Phone: (415) 494-4365 Fax: (415) 494-4333