Talk:Hypermedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hypermedia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

DVD can contain hypermedia[edit]

It should be noted that a DVD can contain hypermedia as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.15.179 (talk) 07:18, July 2, 2006‎ (UTC)

Software?[edit]

The ouline in the "Software" section doesn't have any context. What is it about? How does it relate to hypermedia? -- Mikeblas (talk) 03:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a list of software that can be used to produce hypermedia content. The article was lacking in content, I saw it as a way to expand it. I thought the list was too small to be it's own article and too redundant to include in the Application software article. I've seen this approach taken in other articles, so I figured it was the way to go with this one. I also figured it was a good way to show the various levels of hypermedia publishing from text-based to graphics. I renamed the section if that helps. Oicumayberight (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Except, it's not a list of software. Sometimes, it's a list of types of software (eg, "programming tools"), and sometimes its a list of specific products. In either regard, it doesn't seem to be very complete and certainly isn't referenced. -- Mikeblas (talk) 04:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if there were articles for all the software types to link to as examples. For now, the few specific products are only serving as example of types. Like many other wikipedia articles, it's a work in progress. Oicumayberight (talk) 05:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

neutrality[edit]

--Chrismiceli (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)In this article, there is an unreasonabe mention of the iphone and a description of a movie as "quite good". I do not believe this is neutral. --Chrismiceli (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

non-linear medium of information[edit]

What is a "non-linear medium of information?" This is applying mathematical terminology to a place where it makes no sense. dino (talk) 23:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a conventional term in the field. A better term might be "non-sequential", and a number of researchers follow Moulthrop in preferring the latter. MarkBernstein (talk) 18:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Claim from Psychology[edit]

I'd like to initiate discussion of the "claim from psychology" that hypermedia resembles cognition. It is currently sourced to an early and obscure conference paper -- I'm not sure if it was refereed -- in a secondary conference. While this claim is advanced by journalists (and ridiculed be hypermedia detractors), I think it has seldom been argued by hypermedia proponents. MarkBernstein (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will have a look for the relevant papers. As for presentation, it makes sense to mention the subject. However it needs to be kept in context. If it is about learning and compatibility, there is probably something in it. Ie there will be a difference between learning from text and learning from hypertext. Its probably just a matter of options and flexibility conveyed/needed on the part of the user. From memory, researchers have made distinctions between printed text and hypermedia in that hypermedia fits a more constructivist perspective of learning. This is becoming more relevant as users are becoming more able to create (construct) their own links between subjects on blogs wikis on their own and in groups etc. So yes, I agree, its a good idea to keep the claims accurate, and in context, and with any relevant controversy added. Lam Kin Keung (talk) 06:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The funny part is I love finding an ancient web page where someone shared a bunch of information they found while working on some pet project in detail (where the only links were a home and an index / back button). It's like a magic gem in the toilet of sites designed on the principle of "hypermedia" and the even deeper sewer of information now only available in the form of youtube videos because everyone who just wrote something down in a couple of paragraphs is now buried 1000 pages deep (because they weren't actively spamming... I mean "search engine optimizing"). I suppose if hypermedia is a model of the cognitive process of the average person then this theory is accurate. A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 11:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Laymen's terms, please.[edit]

Is this true? Hypertext = text that can be found using a hyperlink. Hypermedia = media that can be found using a hyperlink = a superset of hypertext?

If so, can this be stated in laymen's terms on the main page of the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.182.34.126 (talk) 22:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]