Gibson Samantha Gibson Daniel Powell ENC 3241 February 3rd, 2013 When comparing the writing style

of authors, it is important to recognize some of the basic factors that play into the individual piece that was written. Considering the audience that a paper was written for- their level of education, expected familiarity with the topic, and the context under which the paper is expected to be read- will need to be taken into consideration when comparing two different papers written for two different audiences. In this scenario, the two papers approach complimentary subjects, though theyre not the same. In Jeff Terraces Content Conditioning and Distribution for Dynamic Virtual Worlds, the subject matter is virtual worlds, and specifically the Metaverse platform called Sirikata. Although this paper is very technical in nature, it is written to an audience that must understand some of the jargon of virtual world programs because they are companies making business decisions that will affect their clients, and thus their foundations. Thus the audience is expected to have a bit of knowledge within this field. The paper by Daniel Lynch, The Art of Digital Publishing: A foundation of combined standards to support the future of publishing, is a very technical, computer-knowledge based paper. However, this paper is used as an introduction to creating interactive digital texts for students of math, physics, and engineering by their professors, who also act as experts in the field. These professors might know textbook formatting, however, website programming can be

complex to someone born in a generation where computers were not used so liberally throughout

Gibson schooling as they are currently. Since this papers usage is going to be more instructional, it is important that it builds upon rather basic information to create a holistic idea and ability for being able to create this interactive text for the students. In comparing these two papers, taking into consideration the audience and purpose of each, I believe that Terrace is the stronger communicator. His Abstract section is written at a

level that can be interpreted by an audience with little knowledge of Metaverses. The purpose of the paper is very clear, indicates the two different systems that will be analyzed throughout the paper. The abstract defines unknown elements, such as the lines explaining that Sirikata has an automatic, unsupervised conversion process that transforms 3D content into a format suitable for real-time rendering while minimizing loss of quality. This explanation helps support the conclusion of the paper, which is also presented in the abstract. Lynchs paper also has a strong abstract, however, the history of how the printing press was created is included early on in the paper, which is extraneous to the papers purpose. Overall, Terraces method is just more direct.

Both papers were very well structured considering the table of contents, the subdivisions within the paper, and the basic architecture of the paper overall. However, the overall breakdown of each section within the Lynch paper allows for a better transmission of information. For example, the subject of one section is 8.6.2 pspicture. Upon entering that section, the introduction of this section says, the very first step in creating a graphic to use the pspicture command., which is then followed by the scripting required for this command. Each scripting section is set up in this fashion, which helps the reader better comprehend the material that they are trying to learn. An added bonus to this style of a set up, is that if the teacher forgets a

Gibson particular scripting command at a later date, all they need to do is follow the table of contents to the topic they need and the step-by-step scripting is right there for them.

Syntax and cadence are central to a great flow in the reading of the paper. Writing such as The Metaverse: a place where users are unconstrained by the rules of the virtual environment. New 3D art can be added to the world, new behaviors can be programmed into virtual avatars, and new applications can be built on a whim (Terrace), creates a choppiness in the writing, which can also cause a reader to have to re-read a sentence to understand its meaning. However, Lynchs paper creates a smooth, constant reading experience, as seen in this excerpt; The future of building interactive user interfaces should lie not in the hands of programmers, but in the hands of the expert of a given field- the goal of this project is to supply math, physics, and engineering professors with a platform to express mathematical concepts to students to provide immersive learning environments. Terrace excels as a writer in communicating his point in a fairly straight-forward manner, although the sentence structure may be a little hard to follow. In the future, it would probabl be beneficial to him if her were to try to read the paper out loud to see if each paragraph, and the paper on a whole, has a consistent flow. On the other hand, Lynchs paper could probably have cut out a lot of extraneous information that was presented early on in the paper. It would create a more professional paper overall. Overall, both of these papers are fantastic in their ability to fulfill their purpose in a way that most of the audience will be able to respect. In considering the audience and communication strength, I believe the Terrace paper is stronger overall. However, Lynchs paper provides an easier read to the proper audience members through the design and cadence of the paper. As

Gibson

such, both papers excel in their own ways and this analysis shows how complex it can be to write a technical paper that will please all audiences.