At one time, a text book could be referred to as the definitive source on a particular concept, proposition, or scholarly paper expounding an enhanced or changed view opinion in relation to the subject matter. MacMillan now have 'DigiBooks' where the content can be edited to suit the requirements of a particular course on a subject matter.
While this is an interesting concept in line with the digital age and the ability to mix and mash a variety of sources to produce the required result, I wonder where this leaves anyone who makes extensive use of research material and references these in their work? If you refer to a publication that is constantly changing, how can you do so with confidence and authority? At what point do you have something that can be determined as 'Version 1.13' (or whatever) of a book if the changes are not properly and effectively made? Knowledge changes with time. Known facts should not.
No comments:
Post a Comment