building a bridge to the 18th c
Return with us now to those golden years of yesterday, brouse the 18th c.
HA! haptic
“There is no reason they should be harder to understand. But we think readers develop strategies about how to remember and comprehend printed texts, but these students were unable to transfer those strategies to computerized texts.”
readability study
The duh moment was picked up from an
IT blog with kindly reference to FotB.
(I am convinced that the
YouTube skit has been there over a year but not discovered by the IT help desk audience. The first exposure was to the theme of the scroll to codex transition a dead end, but the metaphor to screen text navigation training is both relevant and profound.)
art of the book
Book artists accentuate and define their practice in the context of the
narrow discipline of 
when they should project in the much more comprehensive and lively domain of the art of the book. This is where a much larger community of content providers operate.
Environments such as the
writing university or the
literacy and literature center can position book art in a more generative relation with the domain of the transmission of conceptual works. The WU even positioned Richard Minsky as a content provider.
origone ioway
The
library of the University of Oregon has kindly posted links both for FotB and UICB.
gift economy publishing
“In their terms, it’s pretty hard to argue that a search index such as google is a transformative use of the OW, because it only has meaning to the extent that it guides one accurately to the literal text of somebody elseís work.”
IFotB
The interface of bibliographic utilities with bibliographic works engenders authentic new meaning but where does the new meaning “reside”? Weirdly it resides in the source original. In essence protection is conveyed to suddenly extended content stuck onto the parent format.
This is how the gift economy of on-line content search profits print publishers way beyond simple promotion.