Monday, September 09, 2002

Ashby Kulman chimes in on a true blogdom discussion on link types debating UIs and the exact types, more at holovaty. In a world of google, and several orders of magnitude more documents than in early academic hypertext systems (?), link types are due for a conceptual re-evaluation. The seminal academic work on this is Randy Trigg's thesis. Here's Mark Bernstein's slight edit on the types described: Normal Links Commentary Links Citation source pioneer credit leads eponym Background FutureWork Refutation Support Methodology Data Generalize Specialize Abstraction Example Formalization Application Argument deduction induction analogy intuition solution Summarization Detail AlternateView Rewrite Explanation Simplification Complication Update Correction Continuation Comment critical supportive RelatedWork misrepresents vacuum ignores isSupersededBy isRefutedBy isSupportedBy redundant ProblemPosing trivial unimportant impossible ill-posed solved ambitious Thesis trivial unimportant irrelevant redherring contradict dubious counterexample inelegant simplistic arbitrary unmotivated Argumentation invalid insufficient immaterial misleading alternative strawman Data inadequate dubious ignores irrelevant inapplicable misinterpreted Style boring unimaginative incoherent arrogant rambling awkward 11:20:36 PM    comment