50 years ago today the word “hypertext” was introduced
gigaom.com
gigaom.com
> So, I still have a dream that the web could be less of a television channel, and more of a sea of interactive shared knowledge...
(I mean, yeah, the sea of interactive shared knowledge also has a garbage island...)
I chose the excerpt from that full quote poorly. I'll try again, but I'd recommend reading the full linked quote (or watching the original source video).
> The "World Wide Web" program, the original browser/editor, was in fact an editor, and you could make links as easily as you could follow them. And that was fundamental. There are two things which seem to me to be totally bizarre. One of them is the fact that you can't do that [now], that we've lost that. So in fact the thing is not interactive. I don't know if I can think of any hypertext experiments in research where you haven't been able to make links just as easily as following them. Authorship has always been right up there. And now, for some historical quirk, which I could go into, I have gone into, I won't go into, we have a whole bunch of things out there which are "browsers".
The big ideas that TimBL is expressing is still fairly applicable 20 years later.
Other interesting links:
http://hapgood.us/2015/07/21/beyond-conversation/ http://worrydream.com/TheWebOfAlexandria/ http://hapgood.us/2014/08/14/the-web-is-broken-and-we-should...
Given how much the modern web has developed, without significant infrastructure arising to support any of these, I wonder what that says about their utility in our current society, compared to those features which have arisen in the modern web (hyperlinking, anonymity, ephemerality, independence, content-addressability).
Remember also that technology was very expensive so the "ownership, attribution, quotation" system was the basis for micropayments.
By the way, it's a terrific interview, and I highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it....
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=hypertext%2C+c...
It seems that Mr. Nelson has an implicit respect for patents, but I don't know why. I guess he can't be right about everything, or can he?
It doesn't look like there are many new articles being posting, but this is one.