[transliteracy colloquium]

Tomorrow is the big day! We'll be sharing our blossoming thoughts on transliteracy with a wide variety of delegates (including Microsoft, the Cartoon Network, Pixel Lab, researchers, practitioners, etc...). I'm looking forward to hearing what transliteracy might mean to an artist or perhaps to an engineer - will be a great learning opportunity.

On the topic of web 2.0 I see the BBC seems to agree with Jakob Nielsen that web 2.0 isn't about *good design*. Hrm...sounds a bit like *authors* who say a narrative isn't a narrative anymore when there is the addition of sound, image, video, etc...apparently words need to be sufficient to create the scene for readers, if words don't do the job, then that's not a good narrative (I have had *real life* authors tell me this btw)...but who says multiple modes actually do the same job as words? Aren't all representational devices different and each has a specific affordance? It all seems a bit to foreboding and reminiscent of the Digitise or Die panel...especially when Nielsen says: "Although people in their late 30s make very different use of the web to those in their teens, Mr Nielsen expects that when those teenagers grow up the time they spend online will diminish." My online use as only increased with age (although not 30...yet!)