AI Summary:
Dene Grigar presented her work on The NEXT, a virtual museum and library that shows born digital objects. The Next currently holds over 3000 digital works and is unique in its approach to making physical artifacts accessible in virtual space. A key focus of her presentation was the visualization of physical objects in VR, allowing users to interact with them in ways impossible in traditional museums. She emphasized how The Next breaks down the separation between viewer and object through immersion, highlighting examples like Uncle Buddy’s Phantom Funhouse and Deena Larsen’s pinwheel. Dene is preparing this presentation for an upcoming TED talk on March 7th. Her core argument is that virtual museums should allow direct interaction with objects, unlike current VR museum experiences which maintain traditional viewing distances and barriers.
Dene Grigar (Professor at Washington State University, Co-PI), Frode Hegland (Co-PI), Tom Haymes (teaches at Houston Community College), Mark Anderson (Knowledge tooling expert), Peter Wasilko (Regular participant), Karl Smink (Military VR developer & student), Fabien Benetou (WebXR developer), Rob Swigart (Regular participant)
AI: Speaker Summary
Dene Grigar Presented her work on The Next and her upcoming TED talk. She emphasized the importance of allowing direct interaction with virtual objects and discussed the challenges of digital preservation. She shared examples of successful VR implementations, including a pharmacy simulation project and highlighted the importance of following Aristotelian principles in virtual object design.
Frode Hegland Focused on the importance of metadata and the implementation of Visual-Meta. He discussed the challenges of designing intuitive interfaces in XR and the balance between proprietary and open systems.
Tom Haymes Contributed insights about moving beyond traditional metaphors like paper in virtual environments. He emphasized the importance of understanding the nature of constraints and the need to explore new ways of thinking about information presentation.
Fabien Benetou Discussed technical aspects of WebXR implementation and shared thoughts on file formats and standards. He brought up important points about preservation and accessibility.
Mark Anderson Provided perspective on knowledge organization and the importance of understanding how we describe and define terms. He emphasized the need to move beyond traditional document paradigms.
Peter Wasilko Offered insights about interface design and suggested various ways to implement navigation in virtual spaces.
Karl Smink Shared his experience creating a VR library for the military and discussed the importance of having clear constraints in design.
Rob Swigart Contributed historical perspective and ideas about virtual object interaction.
AI: Topics Discussed
WebXR
– Used as primary development platform for The Next
– Discussion of preservation benefits of using web technologies
– Debate about using WebXR versus game engines
– Focus on open standards and long-term accessibility
Gestures
– Wrist touch to toggle commands in space
– Discussion of interaction with virtual objects
– Highlighting and manipulation of text
– Picking up and manipulating 3D objects
Book
– Moving beyond traditional paper metaphors
– Need for new ways to conceptualize documents in VR
– Balance between familiar and novel interfaces
– Metadata and preservation considerations
Other Topics:
– Museum interaction design
– Digital preservation
– Environmental context in virtual spaces
– Sound design in VR
– Physical object representation in virtual space
AI: Concepts Introduced
Icon – Discussed by Mark Anderson as needing clear definition in the glossary
Paper Metaphor – Discussed by multiple participants regarding its role in virtual spaces
Aristotelian Principles – Introduced by Dene Grigar for virtual object design:
– Material aspect (what it’s made of)
– Formal aspect (what kind of thing it is)
– Efficient aspect (how it’s made)
– Final causes (what it’s used for)
AI: People Mentioned
Hans Pohlsander (mentioned by Peter Wasilko as former classics professor)
Scott McCloud (mentioned by Tom Haymes regarding TEDtalk about visual storytelling)
Richard Holton (mentioned by Dene regarding performance art)
Rob Wittig (mentioned regarding collection)
Shelley Jackson (mentioned regarding Patchwork Girl)
David Kolb (mentioned regarding Socrates in the Labyrinth)
Deena Larsen (mentioned regarding pinwheel artwork)
Douglas Adams (mentioned by Frode regarding virtual graffiti)
Diana Slattery (mentioned regarding Glide work)
AI: Product or Company Names Mentioned
The Next (Dene’s virtual museum and library)
Adobe (mentioned regarding Flash end-of-life)
Unity (discussed regarding game engine preservation)
Unreal Engine (discussed regarding preservation)
Flash (mentioned as deprecated technology)
Shockwave (mentioned as deprecated technology)
Hypercard (mentioned as deprecated technology)
Ruffle (mentioned as Flash preservation tool)
GitHub (mentioned for code sharing)
Apple Vision Pro (discussed regarding stereo video)
Second Life (mentioned regarding virtual environments)
Beat Saber (mentioned as VR game)
Supernatural (mentioned as VR fitness app)
Pokemon Go (mentioned regarding youth engagement)
Visual-Meta (discussed as metadata approach)
Chat Log URLs:
https://futuretextlab.info/2025-schedule/
https://futuretextlab.info/glossary/
https://the-next.eliterature.org/visualizations/
https://mediaarea.net/NoTimeToWait9
https://www.ted.com/talks/scott_mccloud_the_visual_magic_of_comics/transcript
https://www.stjohnscocathedral.com/the-co-cathedral/caravaggio/
https://github.com/icosa-foundation/icosa-gallery/
https://github.com/c-frame/aframe-gltf-model-plus
https://www.augmentedtext.info
Chat Log Summary:
The chat was active throughout the meeting with participants sharing relevant links, responding to discussions, and offering additional insights. Key themes included:
– Discussion of digital preservation
– Sharing of technical resources
– Debate about interface metaphors
– Exchange of historical examples
– Technical implementation details
– Concerns about proprietary vs open source solutions
The Future of Spaces in XR is important because:
1. It represents a fundamental shift in how we interact with information and artifacts
2. It offers new possibilities for education and cultural preservation
3. It challenges traditional constraints of physical spaces
4. It requires rethinking how we organize and present information
5. It has potential to democratize access to cultural heritage
6. It demands new approaches to user interface design
7. It raises important questions about digital preservation
8. It offers opportunities for more engaging and interactive learning experiences
The Next:
The Next: A Virtual Museum and Library Innovation
– Houses over 3000 digital works – both digital files and physical artifacts
– Unique approach: Makes physical artifacts virtually accessible in ways impossible in traditional museums
– Open source and web-based technology choices for long-term preservation
– Available 24/7 and free to access
Key Innovation: Physical Object Interaction
– Unlike traditional virtual museums that maintain “look but don’t touch” barriers
– Allows users to pick up, examine, and interact with objects
– Example: Uncle Buddy’s Phantom Funhouse – users can interact with all components (cassettes, floppy disks, letters) to solve the mystery
– Example: Deena Larsen’s pinwheel – users can blow on and interact with the poetry pinwheel as intended
Technical Implementation Philosophy:
– Uses WebXR instead of game engines for longevity
– Each object maintains its physical world functionality
– Includes appropriate sound effects (like plastic beach ball squeaking)
– Embeds metadata in the code itself
– All code is open source and on GitHub
Why It’s Important:
1. Educational Impact
– Allows students to interact with artifacts they could never physically access
– Provides historical context and hands-on learning opportunities
– Makes rare artifacts globally accessible
2. Preservation Innovation
– Preserves not just the object but its intended interactions
– Documents the physical behaviors and properties
– Uses open web standards for long-term accessibility
– Creates a new standard for digital archiving
3. Museum Innovation
– Challenges traditional museum paradigms
– Attracts younger audiences through interactive experiences
– Removes physical barriers between viewer and object
– Allows impossible interactions (like examining ancient Greek pots up close)
4. Theoretical Framework
– Applies Aristotelian principles to virtual object design:
* Material aspect (what it’s made of)
* Formal aspect (what kind of thing it is)
* Efficient aspect (how it’s made)
* Final causes (what it’s used for)
5. Real-World Success Examples:
– Museum of the Oregon Territory pharmacy project
– Successfully simulated historical pharmacy operations
– Allowed interaction with historical artifacts that couldn’t be physically displayed
– Demonstrated educational potential of VR for historical preservation
This work is significant because it establishes new paradigms for:
– Digital preservation
– Museum interaction
– Educational access
– Cultural heritage documentation
– Interactive historical experiences
It represents a fundamental shift from passive viewing to active interaction in virtual museum spaces, while maintaining scholarly rigor and focusing on long-term preservation.
1 comment