THE WORK OF ART IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL REPRODUCTION an example of virtual feedback during composing process srcurrie: if I create a piece of hypertext art, and
view it on my machine, it will not necessarily look
exactly the same on your machine
srcurrie: if we use different software, the binary
will be deciphered differently, and my expression
possibly compromised
srcurrie: tables look different between browsers,
etc.
LTracyP: i know, I know
LTracyP: difference being that variations can be
quantified
LTracyP: I'm trying to stay away from that,
though
srcurrie: in the near future - 5 years, though. it
should be all standard
LTracyP: good
LTracyP: then in 5 years my essay will be valid?
srcurrie: all art created between now and then
may have to be changed to "preserve" them.
srcurrie: so it doesn't much matter as long as we
know the artist's intended browser
LTracyP: hmmmm
srcurrie: it will be the same way we preserve
painted art
srcurrie: the"next generation browser" will give
TOTAL control
srcurrie: so just take the artist's file and recreate
to look exactly how it did in his browser on the
new standard one
LTracyP: forever?
srcurrie: the browser won't be standard forever,
nobody could make a claim like that. all we have
to do, though, is change the art the next time a
new standard comes out. (another treatment)
LTracyP: sigh...
srcurrie: the best part about this is that a human
doesn't have to do it...there will be no bias
LTracyP: ah-hah!
srcurrie: a computer program can very simply
take the code that has been written, ask what
browser it was intended to be viewed on and at
what resolution, and change it so it looks
EXACTLY the same for whatever the new
standard is
srcurrie: mathematical certainty to tolerances in
the thousandsanths
srcurrie: the author can do it himself, to update
his work, and possibly his message, or if not
willing or able can allow a computer to do it,
bias-free
srcurrie: is any of that useful for you?