Back to top: An example
A diagram
Back to top: An example
Theoretical framework
This diagram explains graphically the concept of digital dimension in the light of a flow of thought moving within and between different planes, in an interplanar way.
Looking at the graphic, it will turn clear that a reader (and not just a mere “user”) of interplanar websites, will have multiple choices of navigation, along a path of a “long and expanded argument” which is not pre-determined, but open to different directions and multiple interlaced levels.
In a way, both the writer and the reader of an interplanar website have to face the challenging oppurtunity of approaching digitality in a different manner; surfing such a kind of website implies following a linear argument which, nonetheless, allows “jumping” from a plane A (i.e., a website or a section of it) to another plane B (i.e., another website or another section within the same website) and, from there, the reader can decide to move backward or even to “jump” to another level.
A particular feature of an interplanar website, which could resamble at a first glimpse as a messy conglomerate of scattered information, is, on the contrary a coherent whole where each point or fragment (as in a puzzle) perfecly fits the globality of the system and finds its specific place in a sequence of methodically ordered data.
Back to top: An example
How to read the diagram
To better explain the aforementione theoric framework, it will be worthy reading in depth the diagram presented above, showing the fluidity and versatility of the interplanar system and its valuable resources (different planes):
- starting reading from the middle plane (A), the reader could start with the text segment “a”, then move to segment “b”, leading him (thanks to a hyperlink) to the upper plane;
- from there, another hyperlink could lead the reader back to the middle plane (A), to segment “d” which redirects the reader to the lower plane;
- from this position, the reader could decide:
- to stay on the lower plane, reaching a new segment without hyperlinks;
- to move back to plane A with a hyperlink;
- to jump to the upper plane, again through a hyperlink.
The reader is at the same time, in a kind of dichotomical way, either:
- free to move in all the possible directions;
- pushed or forced to follow a mandatoty predetermined path.
Back to top: An example
The flow
Back to top: An example
Two metaphors
Navigating or surfing an interplanar website implies the possibility of moving along a flow of arguments which is at the same variegated and coherent.
This flow of thoughts and arguments in embedded in the interplanar network described above.
We can take an actual example from Mesopotamian geography to better explain this concept of flowing thought, having a look at the watercourse of the two great rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris:
Both the rivers have their own tributaries:
-
for the Euphrates:
- left:
- the Balikh;
- the Khabur (Upper);
- right:
- the Sajur;
- left:
-
for the Tigris:
- left:
- the Diyala;
- the Garzan;
- the Botan;
- the Khabur (Lower);
- the Greater Zab;
- the Lesser Zab;
- the ‘Adhaim;
- the Cizre;
- right:
- the Wadi Thartar.
- the Wadi Thartar.
- left:
These two rivers and their tributaries are sometimes interrupted by modern dams:
Writing or reading an interplanar website is kind of navigating a flow similar to that of the Mesopotamian two rivers, with many possible paths to be followed:
- taking into consideration the metaphor of the tributaries, it is possible to move from one “great river” (the planes discussed above, actually the different websites) and then, reaching a “tributary” (the single pages of a website), to chose to follow the stream (or flow) of a related argument thanks to the hyperlinks;
- considering the metaphor of the dam, instead, it is even possible to decide to stop on a specific webpage, not continuing following the stream of the “great river” (the long argument), avoiding taking the way of a “tributary” (a portion, either another website or another page in the same website, diverging from the stream of the main argument).
Back to top: An example
An example
Let us consider an actual example: we are reading the present page, and we find a hyperlink redirecting us to the Mesopotamian Politics companion website, on a page about the two “great rivers”:
On this section of the page, there are two links:
- one is to bibliography (red arrow, “Liverani2018Paradiso”, i.e. another plane within the same website); here, we can recall the metaphor of the tributaries;
- the second to another website, Mesopotamian Religion, to a note (6.4u):
Here, the reader will find (in the part framed in the yellow box) a link to an external website (not part of the 4banks cluster); in this case, the link is not active: hence, the reader (recalling the metaphor of the dam) to copy and paste in another tab the URL and look at the suggested website; otherwise, his way will end here.
Back to top: An example
The segments
As it is clear from the diagram above, another feature of an interplanar website is its segmented nature; this means that the whole system is made of multiple connected segments (pieces of information scattered, even coherently, on different planes or along a single plane) which can be regarded at the same time:
- as independed arguments closed in on themselves;
- as argument strictly interelated to other arguments (i.e., other segments).
We can explain this concept with two images:
- that of a segmented line, with arrows pointing to other arguments, as in the following image:
- that of a chain ring of a necklace, reminding us of the metaphor used by Plato in its Ion (?ων; see Plat. Ion 533d-e [Greek, English]), to describe the divine inspiration of rhapsodes, whose “magnetic” faculties are transferred from a chain ring (δακτύλιος, daktúlios) to another, forming, in the end, a long necklace (?ρμαθός, hormathós); the necklace is in this case the whole 4banks hub:
Back to top: An example
Bibliographical references
Back to top: An example