[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Dec 15, 2003, at 9:46 AM, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>
>
> What is the "cognitive style" of writing documents in XML vs.
> PowerPoint, Word, or FrameMaker? Do the tools we use to write affect
> the way we think?
I'll bite. I think the "cognitive style of PowerPoint" is more driven
by the necessity of presenting information in a small number of
discrete slides, each of which is constrained to have no more
information than can fit in a 1024 x 768 pixel space with the words no
smaller than 18 pt font and a strong convention to use simple graphics
rather than words to illustrate something. One can write slides in
hand-authored HTML, or SVG or Flash or Apple Keynote, and you still
have the problems that Tufte notes. Just as dyed-in-the-wool FORTRAN
programmers can write FORTRAN in any language, experienced PowerPoint
Rangers can write .PPT in any format.
"Presentations largely stand or fall on the quality, relevance, and
integrity of the content. If your numbers are boring, then you've got
the wrong numbers. If your words or images are not on point, making
them dance in color won't make them relevant. Audience boredom is
usually a content failure, not a decoration failure"
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ppt2.html
So, a forty word slide with smarmy, incoherent graphics written with
HTML+JPEG or SVG or some other open format is just as bad as the same
slide in PPT. True, PowerPoint and its ilk encourage that by making it
easy to write cutesy slides rather than thoughtful analyses, but that's
Microsoft giving its customers what the sales/marketing consultants of
a generation ago said they should want.
|
