LinkLanguage

“We start using page titles as replacements for whole ideas, allowing readers to “drill down” to the core of all the important concepts, building a LinkLanguage as we build the site.” – AlexSchroeder, Alex:WikiProcess

“People writing in a wiki often put important concepts or terms on separate pages in order to refer to them. If the name of such a page is repeatedly used by many to point to an idea described or discussed on it, the page has become a part of the link language of the respective wiki-community.” – RadomirDopieralski & MattisManzel, LinkLanguage2004

People writing a wiki often evolve a “Link Language:” a fluent language wherein special words automatically link to definitions of their meaning.

This language evolves through conversation, the conversations themselves developing the meaning of the words, and the participants refining the definitions of their meaning in the process of SenseMaking.

By the ideal of LinkLanguage, meanings of new words are not “lost in the air,” as in spoken language, but are contained in distilled form in pages: labeled by the words already used and linked to all of their appearances.

Ideas evolve out of other ideas, forming a deep ArgumentPyramid. Complex ideas are communicated much more quickly, and original sources of difference are identified more quickly as well.

If the direction of the evolution of thought is in the direction of greater complexity, towards greater synthesis, then link language holds promise for the evolution of humanity.

IdealsOfLinkLanguage

LinkLanguage is an ideal, something that people can work toward. It doesn’t necessarily arise on a wiki.

Three of the ideals are:

• fluency – that people should be able to “speak” or write in a natural way
• commonality – that the language develops from the efforts of several people, and that the words and the meanings are commonly understood, or understandable within reasonable time
• automatic linking – that links should form automatically, without resort to URLs or other mind-bending technicalities

Ideally, we would just speak, and the ideals spoken about would magically appear in front of us, fully explaining themselves to the curious mind at an engaging clip, wasting no time, – a PortableExplanation.

Wiki is still far short of this, but this is something of the ideal behind LinkLanguage.

In the meantime, we have found some practices that work well on wiki.

• NamingWikiPages – Name pages such that the page names can be a fluent part of language.
• WikiCoherence? – Work to fit the content of pages into thematic unity, and ensure that language (page titles) match page contents – that language is TrustedLinkLanguage.
• ComputerAssistedLinking? – Use LinkSyntax? (or other methods) to automatically connecting language with pages. CamelCase, AutoLink, and myriad other ideas and strategies.

EffectsOfLinkLanguage

LinkLanguage makes it possible to casually share a ComplexMessage.

In all communication, we struggle with the ParadoxOfExpression, the subtleties and nuances behind words and their interpretation. LinkLanguage opens up the possibility of giving our words themselves something of the interactivity of a live conversation (HyperTextApproximatesConversation.) This way, you can get answers to questions, without even asking the speaker a question.

By giving an evolving body to our thoughts, it can also help us to identifiy original sources of difference; What we call ArgumentRouting?.

MisconceptionsOfLinkLanguage

“The idea that using a WikiWord somehow removes all ambiguity and all of the problems associated in the use of language ignores the reality of language. The relationship between a single word and its meanings comes down to mapping contexts, and wiki don’t currently (to my knowledge) have the ability to establish and maintain the enormous complexity of contextualized language in the use of a WikiWord. WikiWords cannot escape the bind of their meaning being defined in usage.” – MurrayAltheim, LinkLanguage2004 (2004-05-05)

We must MindTheGap– PrecisionDoesntBanishParadox. There is always some degree of ambiguity.

Pages are not “PlatonicCategories,” encapsulating indubitable truths.

“It seems that what is needed is either a resolution that the system is broken, but broken in the same way that language itself is broken, or to try to create some methodology for establishing and maintaining contexts.” – MurrayAltheim 2004-05-05

LinkLanguage and the Evolution of Humanity

The traditional Hegelian model of the EvolutionOfHumanity? involves thesis and antithesis, resolving to synthesis, which becomes a new thesis. (see: PhenomenologyOfSpirit, TheoryBuilding.)

The development of LinkLanguage can make this evolution work at a much faster rate. Here are two specific ways:

• ArgumentRouting? leads to quicker synthesis.
• Efficient delivery of ComplexMessages lead to a quicker distribution of the synthesis.

“ArgumentRouting?” – the isolation of difference to specific points – helps in the development from thesis & antithesis to a synthesis. The greater fidelity we have in understanding perspectives differing from our own, the quicker we can get to the overarching unity.

And the ability to develop and deliver a ComplexMessage in document form (DocumentsVsMessages) mean that a new synthesis can be broadly distributed much more quickly.

The quickest way to develop ideas involve interaction – working in an environment, or meeting with individuals in intimate conversation. When we don’t have access, though, we use non-interactive means, like: books.

LinkLanguage’s supporting environment, today: wiki, (tomorrow: PortableExplanation, or DevelopersVirtualWorld,) makes it possible for us to make documents that are interactive (HypertextApproximatesConversation?,) and further, these documents are evolved from the raw material of our conversations themselves – very close to the people, situations, and questions that animate the ideas (ThePainCreatesTheOrgan?.)

See Also

• LinkLanguage2004 – older version of this page

CamelCaseVsOthers? (CamelCase, PlainLink, LinkSyntax?) – or perhaps better just on the ComperAssistedLinking? (or LinkSyntax?) page.

LinkLanguage Pages Plan

The plan is:

• To continue to tighten this page up around LinkLanguage specifically.
• To complete all TODO’s in LinkLanguageSmallPages.

A “LinkLanguageSeries?” may make much more sense, comparable to “PageMaintainerSeries.”

Consider:

	ComputerAssistedLinking?
	NamingWikiPages
	WikiCoherence?
	LinkLanguageIsMorePrecise?
	FailuresOfLinkLanguage?
	PrecisionDoesntBanishParadox

…but also consider: a SenseMakingInWikiSeries?.

Also Consider: EmergentBehavior (perhaps eating up: SelfOrganizing, StigMergy, CollectiveIntelligence, some Sunir pages), ComplexMessage, ArrowOfComplexity?, ThePainCreatesTheOrgan?, EvolutionOfHumanity? – if you’re really willing to put in the time.

Consider linking to: ParadoxOfExpression, PlatonicCategories, ArgumentPyramid, TrustedLinkLanguage, MindTheGap, TheoryBuilding, PublicRefineryProcess (subj. of evolution), EvolutionarySpirituality (maybe), HyperTextApproximatesConversation, ArgumentRouting?, CamelCase, …

Discussion