Hyperlink book

 

A hyperlink book joins a number of pages with distinguishable content hyperlinks where the top page has text that has, embedded in it, a number of hyperlinks, each is expected to be perused by a novice reader, far more than references which Link to word meaning or the first  empiricist who talked about the concept. It is not as wide as a survey paper, instead presents a number of subtopics, arranged top-down for management or tutorial purposes, not research which is always bottom-up. Proper context is considered by me to be very difficult way of teaching presentation, considered essential to doing a class by a research professor who must be ready for intelligent questions abut related directions, anticipation of next materials, why so and not else, and references to empirical discoverers of the implicit truths.

What problem are you trying to solve?

Papers I see are two kinds - reference every one, mother, wife, Gardner  etc; or reference almost no one. Biography alone in hyperlink epoch is unpa4rdonable explicit violation. But if were done, is not enough! Which links are bibliographic tribute to the empiricist worker and which should be followed by a novice, and which by anyone; is left off. Enter Sir emfubar Moron, the stupidifier. All must be properly refere3nced, according to stupidifier. Smarter reader will not press any link. Some stupidifier editors require the name of the first author and a qualifying integer, such is the power of editors who probably listened to Sir Commie or Sir socialist!

Is that a general problem?

It is in all credit situations, the default rule is "must list credits even if no one bothers", like credits in end of movie and stupider paper from CERN LHC where the list of authors is 1000 long! Only because of some past stupidifier then legacy. The stupidifier-legacy applies to all emfubars of left or liberal kinds! Even conservatives! Every one bows to legacy, sounds liberal-sensible to cheap credit, the worker is happy, and only I consider that worker/liberal behavior stupid and actionable crime of the  union (if any)!

What  else?

Front credits in movie and top few authors are okay. Every credit-worthy author gets a reference to another technical report with a full list. The author can link the report with the say send author name, as reference to next paper! For movies, the credits in each case are shot separately. Any credited-worthy can order any cinema to play it in any show. That will project the credit in credit-worthies context (like his town) in isolation, where the credit will make sense, not forgotten in all places. All credits beyond 2 will benefit by this set of ideas and save me from required acid for commie and liberal morons.

How can hyperlinks be differentiated?

The First is by use of color. Secondly by well-known icons which are inserted and represent non-overlapping classes. Multiple such icons may be inserted whenever several apply. Standard methods can be upgraded in direct editors. In all my future writings, only one link color is used, all others hyperlink bracketed of one letter. [?] lists the letter meaning. [x] is for credit reason.

What are more problems of hyperlink?

If one assumes links are holy, then none. If one assumes sprinkled criminals sometime, then must never click a link, unless target reliable! The stupidest possible advice, morons delivering it must be lined up and shot! Failing that, don't click outside the current author environment and every author is responsible for sounding a warning! I haven't so far! From this day forward, Every safe link I find (self, google, safe reputation) will be accessible as always (click) but will also have [I] suffix by default (sometimes clickable to full list).  Every other link will have and be non-[I] suffix. Easy as author. Easy for a project to parse all such links and replace them once with a warn macro file and target link  and auto-convert such links to warn first links.

Some proper default method is needed to be built-in, failing which I declare current internet faulty in use. Either it is fixed or tools to build sites forbid bad clicks (those forbidden to warn but do not prevent)  and the sites are auditable, then display an auto-verified signature and passed icon granted for that signature. Hard but doable, must be implemented by law, I do it as a project. You will know  that I am done when I lay out a browser add  and auto-tools for site files.!