Graham, I got a chance to read through your piece and I feel as though the quaninty of information that you give at one time is good. Nice flow. However I found myself getting lost because I did not know where to click at times. I am not sure but are some of the paragraphs on single clicks and some on double clicks? I felt like sometimes I double clicked and the paragraph would move before I was able to fully read it.

I also see an interesting theme in many of the piece. It deals with the way we read on screen. When I am reading on screen normally I do not use the cursor as a mechaniel finger that I rub across each word as I read. However, in many of the piece that is the way that the authors want me to move through there text. It creates a different experience for reading. I now have control over the text down to the individual letters moving as we see in Amber's piece.

;;a few thoughts on final projects;;

the range of content, structure, usability and readability was amazingly rich from all the sites viewed last week. its great
to see all the different ways of thinking and approaching
a quick, new project. personally for me, learning css opened
a new mode of thinking and working. inviting that crossing
of mediums, helped me to think about and challenge the conventional book structure and space.

i enjoyed rachel's piece with beautiful type coupled with quirky rollovers that actually made you want to read the footnotes that otherwise would've been discarded. i thought it was a clever way to engage the user.

graham and megan's pieces raised different questions as the reader must interact with the text to get more (and more) information. the viewer would begin to understand that the form does matter in context with the content.

just a few ideas, to get things going...

I would also agree that there was a great range of stuff to look at and it was really nice to see all the different things that can be done with this relatively new medium.

I really liked graham and adrienne's work becuase I could easily get lost in the work. I know that interactive work should be clear and easy to navigate but there was something nice about being lost and searching for the next step. Some of the simple compositions created with text and image were also pretty amazing in both pieces.

Rachel's piece was really refreshing because it was so simple, yet such a practical application of css and navigation. It was also good to see close attention paid to typography on the web. The type was well set and nice to look at, something you don't see very often online.

Both Colleen and Amber's piece provided two different experiences for me. It was one thing to view these pieces in class when I watched someone scoll through them on screen, it was much like watching a movie. But it was completely different when I did it my self. It was a different piece when I was the one scrolling up and down or to the side.

-For anyone whose interested, I've updated my work from last wednesday, you can access it here: http://www.mattherring.net/grass.htm

Matt I really enjoyed your piece mainly because of how well it relates to the structure and read of poetry. You get the initial seizure effect by accidently just rolling through all the lines and being bombarded by the imagery just as you would reading a poem for the first time and thinking what in the world did I just read?

Then you go line by line, taking in all the imagery that is created by the text (and in this case a helping hand by you with the imagery) and try to understand how each line talks to the other and hopefully putting all the pieces together.

I think your next step would be to make each word have a different image, where possibly as you scroll through a line you can tell a story of moving image, as if in a movie. Good job so far though.