Peralli 1

Eric Peralli Daniel Powell ENC 3241 February 3rd, 2013 Critical Analysis One: Achieving a Readable Style Technology is an ever changing field with billions of possibilities and endless chances to make a future in it. The only downside is if you blink, or even hesitate in the tech world, you will be left in the dust due to the fact that technology evolves at a rapid pace. An important way of staying in touch with the changes is to read articles and papers on developments and plans of what is just on the horizon. The Art of Digital Publishing by Daniel Lynch and Content Conditioning and Distributing for Dynamic Virtual World by Jeffrey Terrace are two such papers that introduce the ideas of using technology more prominently in education, and improving three-dimensional virtual worlds with improved framework. Between the two authors, I believe Jeff Terrace is by far the stronger communicator. His use of style and ability to grab the readers attention is far superior to that of Daniel Lynch. For example I consider myself to be tech savvy and have a good understanding of computer software and engines. After beginning to read Mr. Lynchs article I was completely lost, even after dissecting his abstract. I didnt understand what the thesis of his essay was till after I read it a second time, or why he took the approach of using advanced diction. As opposed to Mr. Terraces article, which gave a very descriptive, and well informed summary on what exactly a metaverse was, clearly stated his thesis, and is able to keep the readers attention by using terms and concepts that the target audience should know. An example of this would be when Mr.

Peralli 2 Terrace referenced Wolfenstein and Star Fox as being some of the first three dimensional games. Mr. Terrace obviously knows that the people who would be reading this article would have some knowledge of the gaming industry, and are avid tech enthusiasts, so he references old video games knowing it would keep our interest. After finishing reading, I noticed both reports used a moderate amount of images to illustrate their concepts and points. However, these illustrations were not always useful in assisting the reader to see the authors point. Mr. Lynch made a grave error in the beginning of his paper by assuming that his reader will automatically know calculus and geometry, as evidenced by his pictorial use of the sine graph and derivative graph. When writing a paper, one must make sure that they can clearly relate their illustrations to the topic, while making sure their audience will understand, which is evident in Mr. Terraces paper when he uses an illustration in combination with his explanation of Sirikatas main components, allowing his reader to clearly understand the process of its simulation. The author with a better syntactical approach is Mr. Terrace, who possesses a clearer understanding in sentence structure and vernacular. A good example of this is when he describes the metaverse, Metaverses today, such as Second Life, are dull, lifeless, and stagnant because users can see and interact with only a tiny region around them, rather than/ a large and immersive world (Terrace 2-3). The beauty of this sentence is his comparison of a metaverse to Second Life, which a good amount of the population knows is an online Sims like game, as well as his colorful use of diction that replaces bland words with stagnant and lifeless. Mr. Lynchs use of syntax revolves more around the use of didactic vernacular, passing him off as sounding a tad pompous, something that the reader wont be able to relate to. This is evident in the

Peralli 3 following sentence, In this paper I present a web-based typesetting language for building interactive mathematical user interfaces and learning environments using TEX as the syntax for authorship (Lynch 8). The stronger of the two is without a doubt Mr. Terraces paper. His use of syntax, illustrations, the ability to keep the reader informed, and being able to relate to the reader was far superior to that of Mr. Lynchs paper. The biggest supporter of this was his abstract. Thats not to say that they arent both brilliant writers, however. Mr. Lynch excels in his use of vernacular and syntax, but expects too much background knowledge from his reader and does a poor job explaining the concept of HTML5. If they were going to revise these reports in the future, I would suggest that Mr. Lynch rewrite his introduction to include a better explanation as to what exactly HTML5 is, define static and dynamic, and to better revise 2.2 as it is poorly put together in terms of style. As for Mr. Terraces paper, I would suggest possibly explaining to his audience how exactly a metaverse would be beneficial to our lives, such as the opportunity to view a persons artwork and learn from their style. Overall they were both excellent reports, Mr. Terraces is just much better versed and constructed that Mr. Lynchs paper.