Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
IRList Digest Volume 4 Number 43
IRList Digest Tuesday, 2 August 1988 Volume 4 : Issue 43
Today's Topics:
Email - Change in IRList distribution
Interests - New subscriber, electronic books, hypertext, ...
Discussion - Hypertext definition, according to Nelson ...
- Hypertext defined as nonsequential writing
- Online searching style
- IR on connection machine
Call for Papers - Network Computing Forum
News addresses are
Internet or CSNET: fox@vtopus.cs.vt.edu or fox@fox.cs.vt.edu
BITNET: foxea@vtvax3.bitnet (soon will be foxea@vtcc1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 88 10:27:10 EDT
From: Edward A. Fox <fox>
Subject: email - change in distribution procedure
Hi!
Since it is such a mess sending out Internet mail through Listserv,
I have decided to try an experiment. While Listserv will still be used
to send out mail to Bitnet sites, all other mail will be sent out from
fox.cs.vt.edu
which is on the Internet (through SURANET, into NSFNET). I hope that
this will simplify handling of mail errors (I have been getting some
50 messages per day at least for about a week after each digest issue
goes out, mostly meaningless due to mail incompatibilities).
Please note that fox.cs.vt.edu is not in many of the host
tables, but is reachable through the domain system. It has
number 128.173.2.110 and is served by our campus name server
dcssvx.cc.vt.edu 128.173.4.247
My other address is fox@vtopus.cs.vt.edu which goes through our
departmental mail server
vtopus.cs.vt.edu 128.173.2.1
but since we will be rewiring our computer room and replacing
that machine with others during the next few months, there may be
some mail dislocation.
From the Internet, you can reach fox.cs.vt.edu directly, and
from all other networks that can reach the Internet you can reach
me at the better known address
fox@vtopus.cs.vt.edu
I still am using
foxea@vtvax3.bitnet
as the address you should mail to if you are a Bitnet site, but
eventually, when all host tables are updated, you can use
foxea@vtcc1.bitnet
instead, and that is what appears in outgoing mail from here now.
I hope this is not confusing. In short, if all goes well you
should not notice any difference from the previous arrangement,
except that Internet mail should arrive sooner. Please let me
know if you have any troubles. - Ed.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 88 23:22:05 SST
From: "Tai Hou, TNG" <ISSTTH@NUSVM>
Subject: Help [New member, interests listed - Ed.]
Hi, can you please give me more details on this interest group/s ?
I am interested in IT in general, and specifically in Electronic Books,
Electronic Publishing, and Hypertext/Hypermedia. Thank you.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 88 00:19:09 EDT
From: "James H. Coombs" <JAZBO@BROWNVM>
Subject: Hypertext Defined Concisely
CA Ventura asks:
Does anyone have a good (succinct) definition of what
hypertext/-media is? I am trying to figure out whether or not
an application I am working on qualifies.
T.H. Nelson would respond:
By "hypertext" I mean non-sequential writing. [Computer Lib.
(85).]
the word *hypertext,* as I had already defined it in print,
properly referred to *non-sequential writing,* and that the
interactive system itself should not be referred to as "hyper-
text." [Literary Machines. (1/21-22).]
It seems fair to say that any system that supports non-sequential writing has
a reasonable claim to being labeled a "hypertext system." The second
quotation is useful to drive home the centrality of that concept to Nelson's
vision. In his writing, at least, he works hard to keep our focus on people
instead of on machines and on process instead of on product. I think that
most of us approve of that effort and share its motivations. Unfortunately,
Nelson *seems* to be engaging in linguistic prescriptivism; there are ways to
argue that away, but Nelson might well disagree with them. Whatever his
intentions, it's as fair to speak of "hypertext systems" as it is to speak of
"computer manuals". A manual is not a computer, and a system is not a
hypertext; but the manual presents material on computers, and the system
presents and supports the creation of hypertexts.
But, why not read Nelson for yourself? and Bush? It stretches the mind and
prepares for the development of stimulating tools.
--Jim
Dr. James H. Coombs
Software Engineer, Research
Institute for Research in Information and Scholarship (IRIS)
Brown University
jazbo@brownvm.bitnet
Acknowledge-To: <JAZBO@BROWNVM>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 88 13:55:32 DNT
From: Jakob Nielsen Tech Univ of Denmark <DATJN@NEUVM1>
Subject: HyperText definition
My definition is simply that hypertext is nonsequential writing:
The text is split into a set of nodes and there are pointers
which enable the user to jump between the nodes.
Hypermedia is the same as hypertext except that it uses multiple
media types such as text (again), graphics, sound, movies, etc.
For example, in a HYPERTEXT, the previous word might be highlighted
and the user could click it to see the definition in the first
paragraph of this message. In a hypermedia document there might
be a photo of a bicycle and the user could click different parts
of it to learn how to repair them (use of 2D image as index).
There is more to it than this, and many people use narrower
definitions, while a few use broader definitions (e.g. all online,
dynamic text). Typically, a more narrow definition would require
the system to include structure-oriented browsing support such
as maps of the link structures or bidirectional links.
[Note: Jakob's ideas have helped shape one of the "Hypertext on
Hypertext" versions, that one edited by Ben Shneiderman, of the
July issue of CACM. I believe that ACM is now selling a version
of that special issue on hypertext for Mac's (using HyperCard,
edited by Nicole Yankelovich of Brown's IRIS Project) as well as
the IBM PC (HyperTies) version edited by Ben, and that a version
(using KMS) for SUN and Apollo is also almost finished. As the
title suggests, the idea is to learn about hypertext by reading
about it using a hypertext system. - Ed.]
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 88 10:24:16 CST
From: Jeff Huestis <C81350JH@WUVMD>
Subject: More on searching styles, costs, and IR research
As long as we seem to be having an actual DISCUSSION about searching
styles, etc., I've got a couple other things to say. As far as the
cost issue is concerned--that's going to change very soon.
End-user searching is coming on a larger scale than what we've seen
so far. Local library systems, currently limited pretty much to
online catalogs, will be offering IRS type searching of what people
in the catalog world
are starting to call "reference databases", ie., what's
on DIALOG, etc. Library politics being what it is, it is almost
certain that a fair portion of this will be subsidized--free to the
user. Cost as a consideration will become more important at the
macro level and less important at the micro level.
The distinction between online catalogs and IRS systems will become more
blurred, making the nice matrix shown in [Borgman, Christine L. "Why
are online catalogs hard to use? Lessons learned from
information-retrieval studies", Journal of ASIS 37(6):387-400 1986]
somewhat more complicated. It would be good to blur this distinction;
I'm not sure that end-users have ever considered it very important.
It will be possible to capture much more information about user
behavior. Aside from correlating search logs with circulation
statistics and photocopying records, we'll be able to corner a few
people and "survey" them.
We could enter a "hundred-flowers" [ref. Mao's Cultural Revolution]
period of research and development, with IR studies becoming a
cottage industry in every hamlet running a (modifiable) local system.
Given appropriate safeguards [ref. the FBI's "library awareness"
program], people that are now doing sophisticated IR research with
test files could be using more real data with something more
detailed than catalog and circulation records.
Well, some of this isn't so new, and some of it may not be so true,
and some of it may not happen. What is certain is that the "real
world" side of IR will become more decentralized, and we should be
thinking about the implications of that for IR research.
[Note: I know that OCLC is engaged in task analysis and other
studies of users and their needs - has anyone heard of other
studies by information producers and providers (the folks who
have a need to know about all this) that may become available for
formal or informal publication? I agree that as we move more
into providing multimedia information in digital form to end
users that we have a lot to learn about needs and preferences,
which should help us better "personalize" and "individualize". - Ed.]
Nuff sed.
--Jeff Huestis
Washington University
St. Louis
------------------------------
From: wyle%lavi.uucp@cernvax
Date: 29 Jul 88 10:23 +0200
Subject: IR on connection machine
>Importance: high
>Errors-To: wyle@solaris.uucp
>X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (6.3 6/25/88)
A few comments appeared in comp.misc on usenet, regarding Dow Jones'
use of connection machines:
Article 1084 of comp.misc:
From: jaw@eos.UUCP (James A. Woods)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Colorful Quips about Connection Machines
Keywords: Dow Jones
Message-ID: <1154@eos.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jul 88 23:47:01 GMT
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, California
Lines: 51
a smattering of comments from an article in Computerworld, July 18, 1988.
The protagonist:
Bill Dunn, executive VP of Dow Jones & Co.,
a 1.4 billion dollar information services giant,
who just spent a piddling $5.3 million on ...
The machine:
(two) Connection Machine(s), to supplement some IBM 3090s,
4300s, and DEC VAXen they'd rather junk.
The initial impression:
"It was a 12-sided hypercube -- I thought that was something
you put in a drink," Dunn recalls.
The problem:
"We have this fantastic service," Dunn says, "a wonderful business
amalgam of 70 billion characters of information on computers in
networks, on packet switches, with terminals and personal computers.
And if I walk up to this fantastic collection and say 'How is Boeing
doing in its competition with Airbus?' I'll wait ... and wait ...
and then I'll see 'Zero documents.' Then I play the machine's game.
I type in 'Boeing' ... I get 8,763 documents. I try Boeing and Airbus
... 392 documents. And the meter is ticking at $2.40 per minute,
and someone wants the answer and you're on the phone and sweating a
bit. Then I say, 'The heck with it, it's not worth it.'
Dunn is outspoken in his disdain for the unfathomable "Boolean"
gibberish need to prompt today's computers.
The solution:
Thinking Machines Inc. relevance searching algorithm with feedback,
programmed in C on a VAX frontend.
or, as Bill puts it:
"The Connection Machine is really an idiot. It runs like a
son of a bitch, but it drools at the end of a 100-yard dash.
You have to have another mechanism that wipes its mouth, pulls
its pants up and takes it over to get the blue ribbon."
The prize:
Real-time access to six months of hundreds of publications like
The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Business Week, USA Today, etc.
Viewing the investment as a "drop in the bucket" compared to
$250 million the company spends just on printing presses, Dunn
forsees the purchase of "many, many more" such machines.
Summing up:
"With Thinking Machines, we were the great white hope," Dunn says.
"They were tired of blasting missiles out of the air or splicing
genes in a mouse gonad. Here was something that could actually
benefit mankind."
-Mitchell F. Wyle wyle@ethz.uucp
Institut fuer Informatik wyle%ifi.ethz.ch@relay.cs.net
ETH Zentrum
8092 Zuerich, Switzerland +41 1 256-5237
------------------------------
Date: 29 Jul 88 12:31 PDT
From: William Daul / McAir / McDonnell-Douglas Corp <WBD.MDC@OFFICE-8.ARPA>
Author: Beverly Pieper <BKP.MDC@office-8.arpa>
Subject: NETWORK COMPUTING FORUM - CALL FOR PAPERS
NETWORK COMPUTING FORUM
CALL FOR PAPERS
OCTOBER 5-8, 1988
HOLIDAY INN WESTPORT, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI
The next meeting of the Network Computing Forum will be held on October 5-7 in
St. Louis, Missouri. This will be the fourth meeting of the Forum, and will
focus on the role of the Forum as a catalyst for change in the industry. The
Forum is an industry group chartered to lead the way for rapid adoption of
multi-vendor network computing concepts and technologies. Forum meetings allow
representatives from users and vendors to work together on common issues in an
open, informal atmosphere. The Forum has over 100 member organizations, and
more than 220 representatives attended the May 1988 meeting.
Forum meetings are organized into three sessions: a conference featuring
invited papers and panel sessions, meetings of interest groups and working
groups, and a policy making executive committee meeting. Some areas of
interest to the Forum member organizations are listed, to suggest possible
topics for papers:
Definition of user requirements for network computing
Practical experiences using network computing concepts & technologies
Partitioning and/or integration of applications across networks
Remote procedure calls and other core services for network computing
System and network administration for networks of heterogeneous computers
User interfaces and user environments for network computing
Software licensing in a network environment
Data representation and command scripting across heterogeneous networks
Use of network computing with IBM mainframes (MVS and VM)
Invited Papers
As part of each Forum meeting, papers are invited from the community at
large for presentation and discussion. These papers should address the use
or development of network based applications and services. Emphasis should
be placed on creating and using tightly coupled links between multiple,
heterogeneous computer systems. Technical descriptions of research
projects, user experiences, as well as commerically available products are
welcome. Invitations are also extended for more informal talks on practical
experience in administering heterogeneous computer networks. All
presentations should be 35 minutes in length, with 15 minutes of discussion
following each presentation.
Abstracts must be received by August 10, 1988. Abstracts should summarize
the paper in two or three paragraphs and include the mailing address,
affiliation, and phone number of the author(s). Notification of abstracts
selected will be sent on August 19, 1988 and papers must be submitted no
later than September 20, 1988. Papers can be copyrighted, but must include
authorization for unrestricted reproduction by the Network Computing Forum.
Papers can be marked as working papers to allow future publication.
SEND ABSTRACTS BY AUGUST 10, 1988 TO the Program Chairman for the October 1988
meeting:
T.D. Carter
c/o Jan McPherson
McDonnell Douglas Travel Company
944 Anglum Drive, Suite A
Hazelwood, MO 63042
(314) 233-2951
Internet Address: TDC.MDC@OFFICE-8.ARPA
------------------------------
END OF IRList Digest
********************
