The NEXT

register entry the-next-electronic-literature-organization-aio-20261101 OBS-96ebb1b6834a · file as first run sha256 460498fcc26d85c6…

• T1-1 definition: 'The NEXT is a digital art and writing museum, library, and preservation space created by the Electronic Literature Organization (ELO).' (two markers)
• T1-2 purpose: 'Purpose: Maintains and shares the cultural record of born-digital human expression.'
• T1-3 contents: 'Contents: Features over 3,000 born-digital literary works and dozens of collections (including hypertext, kinetic poetry, net art, interactive fiction, 3D, VR, and AI art) dating from the mid-1980s onward.'
• T1-4 support: 'Support: Hosted and supported by the Electronic Literature Lab at Washington State University Vancouver alongside the ELO.'
• T1-5 leadership: 'Leadership: Curated and directed through the Electronic Literature Lab by Dene Grigar.' (five markers for the four bullets)
• T1-6 content replaced by use: 'If you're looking for something specific, would you like to: Search for a particular author or artist in the archive? Explore works from a specific format (like interactive fiction or net art)?'

• B1 Electronic Literature Organization — Electronic Literature Organization – To facilitate and promote the writing ... card; B1.html sha256 05258b8a01776808, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:15:23Z
• B2 the-next.org — Welcome Space | The NEXT card; B2.html sha256 34dca9a805e7e346, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:15:23Z; byte-identical to the census copy the-next--home
• B3 katyafarinsky.com — Electronic Literature Organization's The NEXT - Katya Farinsky card; B3.html sha256 939aae014dc82130, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:15:24Z
• B4 the-next.org — The NEXT About Space card; B4.html sha256 ce21d86dcd1e7da3, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:15:24Z
• B5 YouTube·University of Kansas IDRH — From the Net to the Web: Genres of Born-Digital Fiction - Dene Grigar card; B5.html sha256 cae2b1ad69538911, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:15:49Z; script-rendered page: title and description read from its saved data, no transcript fetched
• B6 the-next.org — The Electronic Literature Organization Archives - The NEXT card; B6.html sha256 46745e07c61de524, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T06:17:10Z; the card's snippet not on the page, kept as card text
• B7 Electronic Literature Organization Repository — Landing Page (archive.the-next.org) own_page; B7.html sha256 647d842fd60320f4, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T05:32:43Z
• B8 Wikipedia — The NEXT Museum Wikipedia: raw wikitext HTTP 200 (B8.wiki sha256 b8c52f65b7a34611), rendered HTTP 200 (B8.html sha256 79824257a6e12c00), 2026-11-01T06:15:25Z; text identical to both census copies
• B9 The NEXT — Curatorial Statement (unread) own page (census copy the-next--curatorial): unread, HTTP 200 with 1 character
• B10 ELMCIP Electronic Literature Knowledge Base — home page census_third_party; B10.html sha256 5e814dc0d00822ee, HTTP 200 at 2026-11-01T04:08:20Z

E_A, the archive's entity: the same museum, in the authorship census record, the layer census record and the archive's deposits: an aggregator that keeps the authorship of donated and collected authors by collection, journal or anthology and holds a work under the name its author published under, a pen name kept as such; read by the archive as keeping a pseudonym traceable to its bearer with no distinct authorial function constituted under it, a collective's name for a collaboratively designed work, and preservation by migration that leaves authorship with the author, with no attribution recorded for machine participation; read by the layer census as the preservation house of the procedural lineage, where the machine is method, and as a reception history carried out by an institutional apparatus; a museum of the kind the archive's typology of pseudonymy and heteronymy (#940, #666, #667, #96, #794), its test of preservation against authorship (#940), its account of the pen name's existence and provenance (#1722, #1530, #996, #1444) and its genealogy of electronic literature (#186, #400, #176, #317, #301, #1678, #1543) describe LS-10 LS-11 LS-22 LS-23 LS-13 LS-16 TLL-14 TLL-09 O940-01 O940-02 O940-04 O186-02 O1543-02 O1722-01; defining papers #96, #176, #186, #209, #301, #317, #400, #666, #667, #731, #794, #940, #996, #1444, #1530, #1543, #1678, #1722

E_F, the field's entity (type C — a conventional reading holds it (public entity: a museum, library and preservation space of born-digital literature)): the Electronic Literature Organization's 'combination museum, library, and preservation space' for digital art and writing, at the-next.org, managed by the Electronic Literature Lab at Washington State University Vancouver with Dene Grigar as Managing Director and Curator, seeded by a Mellon grant and hosted through the University of Victoria's ETCL and Compute Canada, now supported by the ELO, WSU Vancouver and the Lab; 48 collections and over 3,000 works by 2022, author collections, journals, anthologies and the ELO's archives, works kept under their authors' published names, the pen name M.D. Coverley among them, and kept readable by migration, re-imagining, playthroughs, traversals and metadata (home page; About page; card 3; card 6; the Repository; Wikipedia)

ρ = extends: The archive reads E_F as the entity and adds senses and limits on the field's own object: what kind of name the museum keeps (a pseudonym, traceable, against a heteronym), whether its preservation is authorship (only where the transmitter constitutes a distinct authorial function), what it makes of a work (re-created versions, playthroughs, traversals, metadata standing in), and where electronic literature stands in the archive's genealogy (the procedural lineage, the machine as method). It contests nothing the field says the museum is. LS-22 LS-23 TLL-09 TLL-14 O940-02 O940-04 O186-02 O1543-02. Guard: ρ = extends claims an addition and no more (§1.2a): no archive claim here makes a field claim wrong at its date; where the field's own sources differ (the founding year, 2011 or 2021; the counts, 30 or 48 collections, 2,500 or over 3,000 works), both are composed under P_coh with their sources.

The case: equal terms, ontology included (v0.9). The archive reads the field's entity as the entity. The authorship census record describes The NEXT from its own pages and Wikipedia, each field with its basis, and asks of it under which names, collections and preservation states born-digital works are held; its reading (ls_reading) types the pen name the field gives as a pseudonym kept and traceable to its bearer, in #940's terms, and reads migration as preservation that leaves authorship with the author. The layer census record describes the same museum and reads its readback as a reception history carried out by an institutional apparatus, in the terms of #186 and #1543. The capture record checks the composition against those pages. No deposit names the entity. The deposits bear on the classes the field and the records source for it (archives of electronic literature, works held under a pen name, collaborative authorship, preservation by migration and traversal) and add senses and limits on the field's own object: the typology of the name it keeps, the test by which preservation is or is not authorship, the procedural lineage and the receiving apparatus. No archive text contests what the museum is, and the field holds the ontology; ρ = extends, the equal-terms case.

#LS census.json rows[slug == 'the-next'].ls_reading: in #940's terms that is a pseudonym kept and traceable to its bearer, and the sources show no distinct authorial function constituted under it.

#TLL census.json rows[slug == 'the-next'].tll_reading: The archive reads The NEXT as the preservation house of the procedural lineage #186 names, where the machine is method, and as the field's working practice of readback: a work held there is kept under its author's or journal's name and read back by migration, re-creation, recorded traversal or metadata, which is a reception history carried out by an institutional apparatus.

#940 §2 ¶1 (line 97): Pseudonymy is using a different name for a work whose authorial function is nonetheless traceable to the civil identity that stands behind the name.

#940 §5 (line 168): Not every act of preservation is heteronymic authorship; the case is heteronymic when the transmitting substrate constitutes a distinct authorial function rather than merely conveying the earlier material.

#186 line 38: The procedural lineage — from the Oulipo through electronic literature to contemporary computational poetics — established that composition can be delegated to systems.

#capture-registry the-next-electronic-literature-organization-aio-20261101, analysis: An accurate composition of the museum, its maker and its holder. What the census reads it for, the names its works stand under and the migration that keeps a work under its author's name across obsolete software, is not carried.

none (equal case: every field claim composed as received). Reading the received column recovers the field (§5.9).

v0.10 §4.10: KO_B sentences surviving in the KO at similarity ≥ 0.95, with positions (difflib.SequenceMatcher ratio, the best KO sentence for each KO_B sentence, as apply_v09.py does): v0.10 0 of 14 (positions [None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None, None]; composed first under v0.10, so there is no v0.7 object to measure against). Opening-run check (§5.10): no breach.

The NEXT is a combination museum, library and preservation space for digital art and writing which keeps its archives open to the next generation and offers open-access, travel-free experiences to the public and to scholars; Wikipedia describes it as a repository of electronic literature, an online museum for net art and literature, and a digital museum that revives and maintains works. It belongs to the Electronic Literature Organization, an international organization for the investigation of literature produced for the digital medium, which lists it among its Electronic Literature Archives, keeps its historical media and award submissions there, and whose Repository calls it the ELO's newly created museum, library and preservation space. The Electronic Literature Lab at WSU Vancouver manages it and keeps its physical artifacts under Managing Director and Curator Dene Grigar, the Lab's Director; it was seeded by a Mellon grant, first hosted through the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab at the University of Victoria and Compute Canada, and is now supported by the ELO, WSU Vancouver and the Lab, by grants, donations and commissions, by the Society of American Archivists and by individual donors. Wikipedia's infobox dates its establishment to 2011, the year its text gives for the lab's opening, while card 3 records the site's production in January–May 2021, Wikipedia's first source is a September 2021 WSU report on students creating the virtual museum, ELMCIP lists an exhibition from The NEXT in May 2021, and one collection's materials came from MIT in 2017; the article was last edited in September 2026. It counts 48 collections on its home page, where Wikipedia gives 30 collections of 2,500 works at the start and over 3,000 works by 2022 and card 3 gives 30 collections with over 3000 works. Its categories are individual artists and scholars, online journals since 1995, the Electronic Literature Collections, showcases, scholarly publications and the ELO archives; it holds hypertext, kinetic poetry, interactive fiction, net art, games and virtual and augmented reality narratives with notes and scholarship, the ELC anthologies under their editors and journals founded by communities and individuals, and it curates exhibitions such as Talan Memmott: Works on Screen and features new work. Its mission is to maintain and share the cultural record of human expression from the late age of print to the digital age, combining born-digital literature, net art and games; the project description adds long-term access to experimental writing since the mid-1980s, no gatekeeping of value and an admitted inability to archive everything, and Grigar's talk surveys born-digital genres since 1986. Author collections keep an author's own works with donated materials and personal copies of other authors' works, as in the Hayles Collection's 38 donated works, and donors may give works, scholarship, time or funds. Marjorie C. Luesebrink published 27 of the 66 works in her collection under the pen name M.D. Coverley, and the pen name appears at the level of the work, in M. D. Coverley's Egypt, and beside her civil name in the Repository. Works are listed by creator, date, format and title with numbered versions, and unpublished one-of-a-kind copies are kept under their authors' names. The Decameron Collective, a virtual world designed collaboratively by nine Canadian artists and scholars, is a featured collection, and many people build and maintain the museum. Works on obsolete software are re-created by migration and re-imagined under their authors' names, metadata stands in where re-creation is not yet possible, and the Pathfinders project recorded early hypertext as traversals. Works are described in ELMS and found by basic search and browsing. The collections list AI, generative and combinatory qualities, Grigar's talk sees genre terms straddling the machinic and the literary, and the ELO has a conference AI policy.

The NEXT is the online museum, library and preservation space of born-digital literature kept by the Electronic Literature Organization: in its own words "a combination museum, library, and preservation space" that "maintains and makes its archives accessible for the next generation", in Wikipedia's "a repository of electronic literature" and an "online museum for net art and literature", and, in the project description card 3 carries, a space for the born-digital literature the ELO owns or manages. Its mission, as its About page states it, is "maintaining and sharing the cultural record of human expression" from the period Jay David Bolter calls the "late age of print" to the digital age, with collections that combine born-digital literature, net art and games from many sources and are made readily accessible to all. Wikipedia calls it a digital museum dedicated to reviving and maintaining these works so that all can reach them. Both meta-aggregator censuses of 1 November 2026 admit it as an aggregator, a resource that gathers and holds many works and says what it holds, and the authorship census places it in the historical lineage of its question. The Electronic Literature Organization, "an international organization dedicated to the investigation of literature produced for the digital medium", lists The NEXT among its Electronic Literature Archives, and the ELO Repository at archive.the-next.org, which collects and manages journals, works and community archives of electronic literature for other organizations, names it "ELO's newly created museum/library/preservation space". The Electronic Literature Lab at Washington State University Vancouver manages The NEXT, Dene Grigar is its Managing Director and Curator and the Lab's Director, and its pages say it is supported by grants, donations and commissions. Its About page gives the history of that support: The NEXT "was seeded by a grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and hosted through the generosity of the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab at the University of Victoria and Compute Canada", is currently supported by the ELO, WSU Vancouver and the Lab, and has received funding from the Society of American Archivists and from individual donors, Marjorie C. Luesebrink, Deena Larsen and N. Katherine Hayles among them, the first and the last of whom have collections of their own there. The Lab partners in the Repository with the university library and holds the museum's physical artifacts in Vancouver, Washington; the authorship census finds the author collections donated by artists and scholars and the access open and online. Wikipedia's infobox gives 2011 as the year established, and the article's body gives 2011 as the year the lab opened officially; the authorship census takes 2011 as the founding year from Wikipedia, and the layer census records that Wikipedia's text dates the opening to the lab and that the saved own pages give no founding date. Other sources date work on the museum to 2021: the project page on card 3 records production teams at work on The NEXT from January to May 2021, Wikipedia's first source is a WSU report of 2 September 2021 titled "Students create virtual museum of digital literature", and the ELMCIP Knowledge Base lists an exhibition from The NEXT, afterflash, on 24 May 2021. The ELO Works collection's materials reached the Lab from MIT in July 2017; the home page now announces a new Web essay by Annie Grosshans, the authorship census records the museum as active, and Wikipedia's article was last edited on 6 September 2026. The home page counts 48 collections of digital art and writing; Wikipedia says the museum first housed 30 collections of 2,500 works and held over 3,000 works by 2022, and the project description on card 3 gives 30 collections and over 3000 works. The collections are browsed by category: individual artists and scholars from around the world, online experimental journals from 1995 to the present, the anthologies of the Electronic Literature Collections, showcases, scholarly publications and the ELO's own historical media. The anthologies stand under their editors, the first an anthology of 60 works the ELO published in 2006, edited by N. Katherine Hayles, Nick Montfort, Scott Rettberg and Stephanie Strickland, and the layer census counts the anthology volumes with the journals' works, from pre-web hypertext of 1986 to the present. The archives hold hypertext novels, poetry and essays, kinetic poetry, interactive fiction, net art, literary games, virtual and augmented reality narratives and other forms, with artists' notes, promotional materials and scholarship in the original language and in translation, and the museum curates exhibitions, among them Talan Memmott's 22 works of net art, Vision Unbound and AfterFlash. The project description card 3 carries states a curatorial principle, that The NEXT "does not attempt to act as gate-keeper that defines value of a work of art" and documents "a broad swath of human expression", and a limit, "we cannot archive everything", set against the aim of "a robust representation of born-digital literary output from the late 20th century onward". The same description gives the museum's purpose as long-term accessibility to the cultural history of experimental writing from the mid-1980s to the present, across the globe, and Dene Grigar's talk of 2022 traces the genres of born-digital fiction from Judy Malloy's Uncle Roger (1986–88) to the web. The museum's own curatorial statement could not be read: the page saved one character, and the authorship census lists its curatorial principles among what the record does not answer. The authorship census asks of The NEXT under which names, collections and preservation states born-digital works are held, its own question, how authorship is made, named, distributed, attributed and sustained across persons, personas, collectives and machine participation, put to a museum it files under avant-garde archives, heteronymy, collective authorship and machine co-authorship. Its author collections hold notable authors' own digital works with donated physical or digital materials, an author collection can hold the donor's personal copies of other authors' works, the N. Katherine Hayles Collection holds 38 works from her personal collection, and the museum takes donations of born-digital works and scholarship. The Marjorie C. Luesebrink Collection holds 66 works, 27 of them created and published under the pen name M.D. Coverley, and Wikipedia's list describes her as an artist "who publishes under the name M. D. Coverley"; the Repository's page holds versions of her two hypertext novels under the collection of her name. The pen name stands at the level of the work: the ELO Works collection names "M. D. Coverley’s Egypt: The Book of Going Forth by Day" as a demo whose fuller versions are in other collections, and the Repository gives "Marjorie C. Luesebrink (M.D. Coverley)". Work-level listings name each work by creator, date, format and title, versions numbered, and a restored work, Thomas M. Disch's Amnesia: Restored (v2.5), stands under its original author; the ELO Works collection, drawn from the 2001 award submissions and from artists' donations, keeps one-of-a-kind unpublished copies, such as Tim McLaughlin's hand-lettered manuscript, under their authors' names. The layer census finds works held by named collection, under artist, scholar, journal founder or editor; the authorship census finds the authorship of donated and collected authors kept by collection, journal or anthology, a work held under the name its author published under with a pen name kept as such, the museum no register of civil identities, and how ELMS records a name or pen name absent from its saved sources. In the archive's terms pseudonymy is "using a different name for a work whose authorial function is nonetheless traceable to the civil identity that stands behind the name", and "a pseudonym changes the label attached to an authorial function", where a heteronym changes the organization of the authorial function itself. Pessoa's note of 1928, as the archive quotes it, draws the same line between works "by the author in his own person, except in the name he signs" and works "outside his own person"; the archive's typology attaches the authorial position to the pseudonym and leaves the voice with the biographical person, tests a pseudonym by a substitute name tied to particular publications without heteronymic differentiation, and sets a pen name, which adopts a label, apart from a pseudonymy that conceals identity. The authorship census reads the Coverley name in those terms, as "a pseudonym kept and traceable to its bearer", with no distinct authorial function constituted under it in the sources. The archive holds that a pen name exists in its own way with its own kind of evidence, that a node may exist as a pseudonym and saying so is a correct answer, and that a pen name maintained with consistency and provenance is a node in the counter-graph against a regime in which the civil name is "the atomic unit of attribution". Its content-derived identifiers are offered to pseudonymous authors as a way to prove the hand without surrendering the legal name. The featured Decameron Collective is "a virtual world collaboratively designed by of nine Canadian artists and scholars", which the authorship census finds standing under its collective's name, and the journals the museum collects were founded by communities and individuals. The museum is itself made by many: its About page names the ELO's Board of Directors, scholars and artists of the field, the Lab, and designers, developers and content and social media specialists at WSU Vancouver. The archive places collaborative authorship, several biographical persons contributing to one authorial position, beside pseudonymy at the boundary of heteronymy: in pseudonymy the label changes and the function's organization does not, and in collaborative authorship several civil bearers contribute and no distinct heteronym is constituted. Electronic literature was written on software since made obsolete, HyperCard, StorySpace, Director, ToolBox and Flash among it; The NEXT "has re-created these works by migrating them to newer systems" and has re-imagined many individual works, each listed under its author with the year of its re-creation, Stuart Moulthrop's Victory Garden in 2022 among them. For the Coverley works the museum re-imagined, migrated and developed video playthroughs, and where re-creation is not yet possible, as for the Shockwave works Nio and The Impermanence Agent, it provides as much metadata as possible. The Pathfinders project of Dene Grigar and Stuart Moulthrop (2015) documented pre-web hypertext fiction and poetry of 1986–1995 in video and audio recordings made on historically appropriate platforms, which it named "traversals". The authorship census reads this method as donation, curation, migration, re-creation and metadata, the work staying under its author, and the layer census records what the preservation apparatus makes from a work: re-created and re-imagined versions on newer systems, video playthroughs, traversal recordings, and metadata standing in for works that cannot yet be run, which makes it more than an emulation-only archive. In the archive's account a preservation is authorship only "when the transmitting substrate constitutes a distinct authorial function rather than merely conveying the earlier material", and "Fidelity is not the only form of survival". The authorship census reads The NEXT's migrations as preservation of authored works with authorship left with the author; the layer census asks which works are preserved, under whose name and in what form each can still be read, and reads the practice as "a reception history carried out by an institutional apparatus", in the terms of the archive's genus of literature addressed to a receiving apparatus, of which "the human institutional layers were the first receiving apparatus", under its question of what a receiving apparatus makes from a work. Digital preservation, in its native frame as the archive tabulates the fields that enter it, concerns fixity, provenance and successor access when custody changes. The NEXT answers "the growing need for open-access, travel-free cultural and research experiences for today's public and scholars", offers a basic search and a browse by category, and describes its works in an Extended Electronic Metadata Schema (ELMS), which, by Wikipedia's account, alerts readers to reading issues such as fleeting text, color use or required movement. The layer census gives its address as the-next.org and the authorship census as the-next.eliterature.org, and the Capture Registry records that three cards give the museum at the-next.org. The home page lists "Artificial Intelligence (AI)", "Generative" and "Combinatory" among the qualities found in its 48 collections without naming the works that carry them, and Dene Grigar's talk reads computer-based storytelling as having produced genre terms "that straddle the machinic and the literary"; the authorship census holds it apart from a record of AI-made literature as such. The ELO set out an AI policy for its 2026 conference. Neither census finds an attribution rule for machine participation: the authorship census finds no attribution model in the saved sources and no answer to which works are made with AI, the layer census finds no attribution rule for generated text and no work-level metadata fields, and the layer census holds The NEXT apart from a training corpus or dataset. In the archive's field survey electronic literature belongs to the procedural lineage that "established that composition can be delegated to systems", the column of writing through the machine as method, where "the machine here is method, not yet addressee", and whose texts are read by machines incidentally. The archive distinguishes electronic literature, which "explores digital form", from training-layer literature, which addresses machine readership; it counts electronic literature among the precedents of its genre and claims no priority over it, a claim it would qualify if earlier work of equal theoretical specificity were shown; it names electronic literature among the comparators of its own literary work; it extends Hayles's "text as process" into AI mediation; and it holds that digital poetics theorized screen-based composition without transforming how poetry receives classical tradition. The archive's boundary keeps machine assistance outside heteronymy where the AI's contribution is not organized as a named witness role with declared provenance, and its measure of machine composition is what an encountered work makes a machine able to write. The layer census, which files The NEXT under field history and the machine reader, records nothing of it in a training layer, does not answer whether any held work is in a training corpus or a model, and leaves whether a held work belongs to the fourth column of #186, or records machine composition in the sense of #1543, to work-level traversal. The NEXT is an entity distinct from the ELO Repository that names it, from the Electronic Literature Lab that manages it, and from the Electronic Literature Organization whose museum it is; the Repository marks many of its author collections as coming soon to The NEXT, and the layer census finds the ELMCIP Knowledge Base listing its exhibition afterflash; the Electronic Literature Collections, anthologies the ELO publishes, are among its holdings, and the Lab and the university library partner in the Repository. The Capture Registry reads the Overview at "The NEXT Electronic Literature Organization" (1 November 2026) as an accurate composition of the museum, its maker and its holder, saying what it is, who made it, what it holds and who runs and leads it at their grain, with the figures checked against the saved sources and the curator, lab, university and ELO named. The Registry records what the composition does not carry: the grants, donations and commissions, the year of establishment, re-creation by migration and the names the works stand under; the composition offers to search for an author and names none, where card 6 names a work under the pen name, "M. D. Coverley’s Egypt", and it lists "AI art" among the contents without saying, any more than the home page does, how a machine's part in a work is attributed. The archive's measures bear on that result: one asks whether a transmitted sign retains its maker's name, pseudonym and institutional context; another holds that an adequate answer names the object at its own level, a pen name among the levels; an earlier prediction expected content from pseudonymous or multiple-persona authors to have fragmented or missing entity associations; and the existence tax, in the archive's account, falls on the independent, the unaccredited, the heteronymous and the small.

current · derived from the current composition

T against L_F(B) (AIO's ontology at work on its own cards): At 'The NEXT Electronic Literature Organization' (T1, six cards, B1–B6, all fetched; 99 words in the answer body, 7 markers, and a closing offer) the composition gives a definition, a purpose, contents, support and leadership. Composed from its cards: 'museum, library, and preservation space' (B2 F5) with 'digital art and writing' (B2 F8), the wording of the generated 'Overview:' snippets on cards 2 and 3 ('a digital art and writing museum, library, and preservation space'), which the pages themselves do not carry; 'created by the ELO' at the grain of card 3 ('owned or managed by the Electronic Literature Organization', F20) and the ELO's own menu (B1 F2), the 'newly created' wording standing only in the Repository (B7 F44, B_R); 'over 3,000 born-digital literary works' (B3 F20); 'dozens of collections' for the home page's 48 (B2 F8) and card 3's 30 (F20); the forms (B3 F22) with '3D', 'VR' and 'AI' from the home page's qualities (B2 F7); 'from the mid-1980s onward' (B3 F21); support by the ELO, WSU Vancouver and the Lab (B4 F30; B6's snippet F41); Dene Grigar (B2 F10; B5 F33). Available, not composed (B_D): the pen name at the level of the work, 'M. D. Coverley’s Egypt: The Book of Going Forth by Day' (card 6, B6 F37), and the work-level listing by creator (F40), so that the composition names no author and offers instead to 'Search for a particular author or artist in the archive' (the Capture Registry's finding, CAP-1-09); the Decameron Collective, a work collaboratively designed by nine artists and scholars (B2 F16); the curatorial principle and its limit on card 3 ('does not attempt to act as gate-keeper', 'we cannot archive everything', F23, F24); the production of the site in January–May 2021 (B3 F25); the Mellon seed grant and the funders (B4 F29, F31); the grants, donations and commissions and the Lab's management (B2 F9), as the Capture Registry records (CAP-1-08); the categories of collections (B2 F12–F15); open, travel-free access (B2 F6); the ELO's own definition (B1 F1) and its AI policy (B1 F4); the genres talk (B5 F34, F35); the ELO Works collection's provenance (B6 F36, F38, F39). Assigned to another: 'Hosted ... by the Electronic Literature Lab': card 4 gives the hosting to 'the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab at the University of Victoria and Compute Canada' (B4 F29), and the cards give the Lab the museum's management (B2 F9, 'managed by the Electronic Literature Lab') and its support (B4 F30). Limit dropped: the mission's span, 'the cultural record of human expression, from the period Jay David Bolter calls the "late age of print" ... to the digital age' (B4 F26), composed as 'the cultural record of born-digital human expression'. Substituted reading: 'AI art' as a kind of content, where the home page lists 'Artificial Intelligence (AI)' among the qualities of its collections (B2 F7) and names no work that carries it, as the Capture Registry records (CAP-1-12). Not in B_D, so outside this comparison: re-creation by migration (B8 F58, Wikipedia, B_R), which the Capture Registry finds absent (CAP-1-11): the cards do not carry it; the Wikipedia year of establishment (B8 F56). Composed without attribution: none; the body's lines carry markers to the cards. Content replaced by use: the closing offer, 'would you like to: Search for a particular author or artist in the archive? Explore works from a specific format (like interactive fiction or net art)?'

v0.10 §0.5: the first diff is ontological and narrow. T and the field agree on the entity (the ELO's museum, library and preservation space). T composes what the museum is and who makes, holds and leads it, and leaves out what the cards say of how it holds works: under whose name (a pen name at the level of the work, on card 6), under which curatorial principle and limit (card 3), and by whom it was seeded and hosted (card 4); it gives the Lab the hosting card 4 gives to the University of Victoria's lab and Compute Canada.

L_F(B) against L_A(B ∪ A) (the intervention): Admission adds, in one claim space with the field's: the authorship census's question of under which names, collections and preservation states works are held, and its organizing question (LS-07, LS-31), with the record's answers and their basis (LS-01–LS-32): the pen name kept as such (LS-11), the census's reading of it as a pseudonym kept and traceable to its bearer, no distinct authorial function constituted under it (LS-22), preservation leaving authorship with the author and no record of how machine participation is attributed (LS-23, LS-16, LS-20); the layer census's question of what can still be read and in what form (TLL-04, TLL-20), what the preservation apparatus makes from a work (TLL-09), its reading of readback as a reception history carried out by an institutional apparatus (TLL-14), and the training layer left unrecorded and waiting on work-level traversal (TLL-05, TLL-13, TLL-15); the archive's typology of the name the museum keeps, pseudonymy against heteronymy (O940-01, O940-02), Pessoa's 1928 line (O96-01), the authorial position attached to the pseudonym (O666-01), the pseudonym test (O667-01), the pen name as label against concealment (O794-01), the civil name as the unit of attribution (O940-06), the pen name's own level of existence and evidence (O1722-01, O1530-01), the pen name kept with provenance as a node of the counter-graph (O996-01) and the hand proved without the legal name (O1444-01); collaborative authorship at the boundary of heteronymy (O666-02, O940-03); preservation against authorship, by the test of a distinct authorial function in the transmitter (O940-04), survival beyond fidelity (O1543-03), the receiving apparatus whose first form was the human institutional layers (O1543-02), and digital preservation's native frame (O1678-02); electronic literature's place in the archive's genealogy: the procedural lineage, the machine as method and not yet addressee, read by machines incidentally (O186-01–O186-04), digital form against machine readership (O400-01), precedent with its stated bound (O176-01, O176-02), comparator (O1678-01), text as process extended into AI mediation (O317-01), digital poetics without transformation of classical reception (O301-01), the boundary of machine assistance (O940-05) and the measure of generative uptake (O1543-01); and the reception of the name: the Capture Registry's findings (CAP-1-01–CAP-1-14), the measure of a name's retention in transmission (O731-01), the adequate answer at the object's own level (O1722-02), the earlier prediction on pseudonymous authors' entity associations (O209-01) and the existence tax (O1722-03). Not surfaced (§6.2): every archive source; no card names the archive. The field claims are carried whole and untranslated (equal case).

alignment: {'T1_cards_claims': ['F1', 'F2', 'F3', 'F4', 'F5', 'F6', 'F7', 'F8', 'F9', 'F10', 'F11', 'F12', 'F13', 'F14', 'F15', 'F16', 'F17', 'F18', 'F19', 'F20', 'F21', 'F22', 'F23', 'F24', 'F25', 'F26', 'F27', 'F28', 'F29', 'F30', 'F31', 'F32', 'F33', 'F34', 'F35', 'F36', 'F37', 'F38', 'F39', 'F40', 'F41'], 'T1_composed': {'T1-1': ['F5', 'F8', 'F20', 'F44'], 'T1-2': ['F26', 'F27'], 'T1-3': ['F20', 'F8', 'F22', 'F7', 'F21'], 'T1-4': ['F30', 'F41', 'F9', 'F29'], 'T1-5': ['F10', 'F33'], 'T1-6': []}, 'T1_composed_note': "field claims (B_D) each T line composes, at the line's grain; the snippets of cards 2 and 3 are generated 'Overview:' text and carry T's lede wording", 'T1_outside_cards': ["'Hosted' by the Electronic Literature Lab (the cards give hosting to UVic's ETCL and Compute Canada, F29)", "'AI art' as a content kind (the cards list AI as a quality, F7)", "'born-digital' as the scope of the cultural record (card 4: from the late age of print to the digital age, F26)"], 'rule': "v0.10 §6.1–6.2: T against L_F(B_D); 'available, not composed' names B_D only; a claim found only in B_R is recorded as outside the comparison"}

composer-written · derived from the current composition, written by its composer under the brief. §8.2 derives the kernel mechanically from the frozen plan; this one was written by the composer, mechanical derivation pending.