Oscillating between the digital and the physical. I’m not sure how it is shaping me. And my writing.
Mistakes in the physical are more apparent. Eraser marks. Crossed out words. Missing letters crammed into insufficient space. None of this comes across digitally. An edit towards clarity loses the meta message. That the work is imperfect. The author imperfect. Consistent corrections compound towards clarity.
This of why Git is such a powerful piece of software. Both the final work and the changes are retained as artifacts. Depending on the frequency and granularity of atomic commits, the entire process can be communicated. With clear commit messages. Inevitably there are typos in the thoughts behind the commits. Git commit amend can correct them. But the acknowledgment of that correction is where visibility into the process ends.
Is this visibility valuable? On different horizons and different levels of engagement. Some people need only receive the final work. Digging into the process does not clarify their understanding. Others want to see how a small word shifted over time. And consider how it changed the meaning. It builds trust to know that the author has considered alternatives.