This paper was written and presented as a hypertext, written in Tinderbox. This is the opening node:

In this hypertext I intend to explore four key tropes of what I'm going to provisionally label as 'digital environmenting' and their relationship to the idea of an affective atlas - or an atlas of affect. These tropes are intensity, vector, and the virtual and actual. These terms are based on a proposition for an affective atlas written by my colleagues where they stated "[an affective atlas] has intensities of the virtual and actual".

To this extent this essay perhaps offers little that is specific to the concept of an affective atlas, but is instead a sketching of the epistemological zeitgeist that informs the philosophical baggage that informs one facet of an affective atlas project. It is the projects intellectual and philosophical 'back story'.

What happens to editing when video moves from a hard to a soft environment? This chapter is a rough-cut sketch that explores what video editing is, and the implications of this for an emerging, network specific video practice. While this essay discusses video with some degree of specificity the practice that is under consideration is not video art but those works that are, for want of a more accurate term at this historical point, representational and in- dexical in some manner. They’re videos of things. Such representational practices dominate internet based video practice including commercial, populist, critical and creative uses.

This essay uses the material thought advocated by Paul Carter to argue for the materiality of writing. It does this by examining hypertext as an academic material writing practice, using ideas from design and hypertext theory. It specifically argues for a crystalline structure in hypertext as the actualisation of virtual possibilities via links and how this is different and novel in relation to existing academic writing.

Contemporary theory in its approach to digital media has largely relied upon traditional notions of story and narrative to understand the similarities and differences afforded by digital media. While this work has been invaluable it has emphasised the ways in which things like hypertext may, or may not be, story like and so has examined the new roles of the reader (Douglas 1994; Douglas 2000), and the implications for multilinearity for story sense. (Bolter 1991; Joyce 1995; Joyce 1995; Joyce 1995; Aarseth 1997; Gaggi 1997; Bernstein 1998; Dovey 2002; Landow 2006) However, emerging dominant digital forms juxtapose highly local content and practices with system wide and global combinatory systems.

This is the brief I was received:
"they have no idea what Web 2.0 means but would dearly like to know how, why, when and it [sic] what way it effects the way they do their job."