Re: Indexes - Printed vs. On-line

["Sandy, Corinne" <CHS8 -at- CPSOD1 -dot- EM -dot- CDC -dot- GOV>]

Re:  difficulty in reading online

Don't forget that a piece of paper is not "luminized" (is that what causes
the screen to have brightness--I'm not sure what you would call it, but I'm
sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong?) so eyestrain is not as prevelent,
which I believe allows readers/viewers to study the information easier.
 When I read my screen I find myself "skimming" instead of "reading."


Corinne
 ----------
From: TECHWR-L
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: Indexes - Printed vs. On-line
Date: Friday, December 23, 1994 8:31AM

Return-Path: <TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
Received: from msmail.em.cdc.gov by router.em.cdc.gov id
    <2EFA7640 -at- router -dot- em -dot- cdc -dot- gov>; Fri, 23 Dec 94 11:03:28 EST
Received: from VM1.ucc.okstate.edu by msmail.em.cdc.gov (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id
    AA14075; Fri, 23 Dec 1994 11:05:32 -0500
Message-Id: <9412231605 -dot- AA14075 -at- msmail -dot- em -dot- cdc -dot- gov>
Received: from OSUVM1.BITNET by VM1.ucc.okstate.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with
    BSMTP id 4062; Fri, 23 Dec 94 09:58:46 CST
Received: from VM1.UCC.OKSTATE.EDU by OSUVM1.BITNET (Mailer R2.08 R208004)
    with BSMTP id 0899; Fri, 23 Dec 94 09:28:58 CST
Date:         Fri, 23 Dec 1994 08:31:47 EST
Reply-To: Richard Lippincott <rlippinc -at- BEV -dot- ETN -dot- COM>
Sender: "Technical Writers List; for all Technical Communication issues"

           <TECHWR-L -at- VM1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
From: Richard Lippincott <rlippinc -at- BEV -dot- ETN -dot- COM>
Subject:      Re: Indexes - Printed vs. On-line
Comments: To: Robert -dot- Morrisette -at- ebay -dot- sun -dot- com
Comments: cc: techwr-l -at- vm1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu
To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L <TECHWR-L -at- OSUVM1 -dot- BITNET>
content-length: 1715
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 --
Bob Morrisette asked, regarding on-line vs. paper in the index:

>Again, why should they be different, except that one is on paper
>and one on the screen?

I think Lori Lathrop had the answer, it's the ability to get a "big picture"
from the printed index. But that still begs the question Bob asked: "Why?"

For the same reason why it's easier to spot a typo on a paper page than it
is
to spot the same typo on a screen - even when vieing WYSIWYG.

Unfortunately, here's where I'm going to fall short: I don't understand why
it's easier to spot a typo on paper. Perhaps it's screen size, or
resolution,
but I have a strange feeling neither of these is it. There's something more
fundimental that we've overlooked -- that we've ALL overlooked -- that
causes
this to happen. We've got to figure out what it is, because it's important,
whatever it is.

Two theories that I've just made up (Caution: these are both "pre-coffee"
theories early in the morning)

1) It's cultural. Even the youngest among us on this list grew up learning
from
paper, and we're more accustomed to absorbing information presented that
way.
If so, then as years pass we'll find on-screen will become dominant.

2) It's in the brain. A piece of paper does not move. A screen image
flickers,
and while it's -fast-, the brain -can- perceive the flicker. Perhaps the
brain
processes the information in a different way, because the brain perceives
motion? If so, then on-screen will have a serious handicap for a long, long
time.

Both of these theories may well be wrong. But I'd be interested in opinions
on
this, as well as -why- those typos are so hard to spot on-screen.

Rick Lippincott
Eaton Semiconductor
Beverly, MA
rlippinc -at- bev -dot- etn -dot- com