4 ms·
There is value in "all" information being text. However there's also value in having interactive elements. From the contextual fitting video to i.e. an embedde
by johannes1234321 7y ago
There is value in "all" information being text. However there's also value in having interactive elements. From the contextual fitting video to i.e. an embedded star map: Imagine reading the article about a solar eclipse and being able to navigate a 3D model of the stars. Imagine reading an article about the human body and having a 3D model right next to it: If you click on "heart" in the text it's being highlighted in the model.
Of course Encarta wasn't there, but we have 20 years of technological advance. But for hobbyist Wikipedia authors that's too much work and for a commercial Encarta Wikipedia is too strong.
- kragen 7y agoHow close was Encarta to that? I never used it.
- johannes1234321 7y agoIt had some simple interactive elements. Boring from today's perspective. Exciting back then. https://www.oldpcgaming.net/wp-content/gallery/encarta-97/Snap105.jpg https://www.oldpcgaming.net/wp-content/gallery/encarta-97/Sn...
- kragen 7y agoCan you describe the ones you most remember? I see the image but I'm more interested in your (memory of your) subjective experience. What level of creative freedom did you have in the interactivity?
- therein 7y agoThe most vivid memory I have of myself spending hours on Encarta as a child was with their "flight simulator" / bird's eye view. I will try to find a video of it but I am sure it will be disappointing in today's standards as well. Best example I could find: https://youtu.be/Dl36Ty2PqMU?t=1147 https://youtu.be/Dl36Ty2PqMU?t=1147
- kragen 7y agoLike Google Earth? I'll check that video out when I have more bandwidth, thanks!