I was interested in the recent post about the architecture
of cyberspace and the comment:
the realm of the language of physical spaces
I have been suggesting the evolution of human interface from
linguistic (symbolic) form to graphic (iconic) form and now,
with cyberspace it's evolving into a behavioural (indexical)
form. Terms in brackets refer to Pierces classification of
semiological relationships.
The concept of a "language of physical spaces" seems strange
because it emphasizes some intrinsic quality of the space
that is detached from the act of observation/interaction.
I'm tempted to suggest that this is no more than the legacy
of modernism (intrinsic artifact as self-referential thing-
in-itself) and would be interested in comments.
Paul
brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
of cyberspace and the comment:
the realm of the language of physical spaces
I have been suggesting the evolution of human interface from
linguistic (symbolic) form to graphic (iconic) form and now,
with cyberspace it's evolving into a behavioural (indexical)
form. Terms in brackets refer to Pierces classification of
semiological relationships.
The concept of a "language of physical spaces" seems strange
because it emphasizes some intrinsic quality of the space
that is detached from the act of observation/interaction.
I'm tempted to suggest that this is no more than the legacy
of modernism (intrinsic artifact as self-referential thing-
in-itself) and would be interested in comments.
Paul
brown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx