Does Ink have an object-oriented world model like Inform, or is it all about branching narrative based on the user's choices?
When I commented on this aspect of Twine versus parser-based IF yesterday, I think I showed my bias toward parser-based IF. But thinking about it more, I've concluded that a world model isn't definitively an advantage. I imagine there are many interactive stories that people want to write where the defining features of parser-based IF, locations with objects that are usually used to solve puzzles, would just be a distraction. Maybe the writer wants to focus more on choices and their consequences than on puzzle-solving in a simulated world.
So I don't ask about Ink in order to critize it; I just want to know.
I have not actually used Ink myself. But from looking through the introductory documentation, the world model seems fairly simple and more like the branching narrative type you mention -- and nowhere near as sophisticated as Inform 7 which can essentially do almost anything and parse any phrase. Which makes sense given the very different needs of a CYOA system like Ink (with restricted choices). However, Ink does support some state variables (like whether you visited a location) so it can be somewhat more complex than just a branching narrative. Ink may also have other features that were not obvious to me at first glance though.
I agree with you that a simpler approach can help someone focus on the story -- which was part of a conscious choice to limit StoryHarp's possibilities via only support simple rules. Although another aspect of that limitation was to make the GUI easier to write and to use -- especially by not having to support editing arbitrary logical statements and not supporting state values that could be other than booleans. While the StoryHarp map is most obviously used to map out locations (or "contexts"), the framework is flexible enough so that these contexts could be any sort of general states like, say, moods (angry, sad, happy, etc.) or general situations (desiring a pet, talking with pet shop owner, inspecting parrot, talking with pet shop owner again, etc.).
Ink is much closer to a markup language than a full programming language (though it does support variables, branching, loops and functions). Where Inform lets you build an interactive world, special-case certain interactions, and provides a full parser, Ink is geared more toward text-heavy, choice-based IF. It's much more fine-grained than something like ChoiceScript (basis for ChoiceOfGames stories).
When I commented on this aspect of Twine versus parser-based IF yesterday, I think I showed my bias toward parser-based IF. But thinking about it more, I've concluded that a world model isn't definitively an advantage. I imagine there are many interactive stories that people want to write where the defining features of parser-based IF, locations with objects that are usually used to solve puzzles, would just be a distraction. Maybe the writer wants to focus more on choices and their consequences than on puzzle-solving in a simulated world.
So I don't ask about Ink in order to critize it; I just want to know.