The Mathematica Book, Electronic Media and MathWorld
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg78524] The Mathematica Book, Electronic Media and MathWorld
- From: "David Park" <djmpark at comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 05:41:05 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <f5qitl$5fs$1@smc.vnet.net> <200706270932.FAA01420@smc.vnet.net> <f5vrpf$kar$1@smc.vnet.net>
Murray has always been a great correspondent who can correct my errors and advance any endeavor. We almost all love books. They still have some advantage over electronic media because of their portability. And right now there is probably more technical material in books than in electronic media. (This however will quickly change.) They make great collectors items. As technical documents that is about the end of their advantages. Mathematica notebooks and pdf documents are far superior - but unfortunately not MathWorld. Some of the decisive disadvantages of books and other printed media are: 1) They are often full of errors and misprints and can't be easily updated. Mathematica notebooks, if written in an active style, are to a large extent self-proofing. 2) Technical books are often too brief. They don't have room for many examples, or examples that require larger output. The old Mathematica Book was quite long and heavy but still in many places too concise to easily understand all the commands. The new features would have doubled the size and weight of the book and still probably have been too concise. Electronic media can contain much more material, perhaps even with alternative approaches that a reader can choose among. Writers of electronic media don't have to be as concerned with bulk and space. 3) Printed technical books are too expensive. 4) Printed technical books are not always more convenient. For example, many of them will not lie flat! They are strictly a two-hand operation. How many times have you had to work between some book and a Mathematica notebook and found that you were always fighting with the book to keep its position? The Mathematica help documentation stays open to where you want and you don't have to change your physical position to access it. At meals I always like to read something or other. I can either read magazines or books or material on our laptop. I find that I more and more gravitate to the laptop because it is easier. The vertical screen is better than the horizontal book and I can usually enlarge the type to make it easy to read. And I have access to more material from the web. However, we are still learning how to write Mathematica notebooks and electronic media. In my opinion it should be a natural extension of the classical style that incorporates the active elements of Mathematica. But there is a lot to complain about in some of the current attempts. Take MathWorld. Here is a site that is top notch, A+++, as far as content and organization go. But in my opinion it is a poor web site because it does not adhere to modern web standards. The text, especially in the equations is far too small and non-adjustable. It is much smaller and with less line spacing than any technical book I can pick off my shelf. Also, the font used for the equations is quite poor. The web page magnification doesn't work either because then the inline formulas no longer fit in properly and overlay parts of the text. Also, sometimes with magnification the text wraps properly and sometimes it does not so one has to do horizontal scrolling. This is a case where electronic media does not live up to its promise - but purely for typological and technical reasons and not at all due to the excellent content. -- David Park djmpark at comcast.net http://home.comcast.net/~djmpark/ "Murray Eisenberg" <murray at math.umass.edu> wrote in message news:f5vrpf$kar$1 at smc.vnet.net... > Although I agree fundamentally with everything that David says about how > to learn Mathematica (and other things as well), there are still three > issues, the third of which some other poster mentioned: > > (1) Still, there are occasions when I want no electronic impediment > whatsoever and just want to look at a book. Clearly some thing are best > learned with the live system, but there are others for which a clear > exposition, with good examples and in a coherent underlying conceptual > structure, suffices. > > (2) As a university teacher for over 40 years, the longer I teach the > more I realize how very different learning styles can be. So a > multiplicity of learning modes and materials is warranted. > > (2) Perhaps it's not so much a printed book per se that I, and some > others, miss, but rather the quasi-linear (and spirally structured) path > through Mathematica provided by "The Mathematica Book". > > Just because the system itself may be a web does not preclude an author > from creating a more-or-less linear path through (part of) it. > > David Park wrote: >> >> As to the lack of a hard copy book: I don't think that a static book is >> the >> way to learn Mathematica. ... Hard copy books are truly inadequate for >> learning the >> new Mathematica. That is probably why there was little effort to produce >> such a book.... > > -- > Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu > Mathematics & Statistics Dept. > Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H) > University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W) > 710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801 > Amherst, MA 01003-9305 >
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Mathematica Book, Electronic Media and MathWorld
- From: Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.edu>
- Re: The Mathematica Book, Electronic Media and MathWorld