OSCE Programme

From The Digital Classicist Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Friday 22nd September 2006, Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London

7 Arundel Street, London, WC2R 3DX (map)

Contents

9.30 Coffee

9.50 Introduction

10.00 Session 1: critical editions

Digital Editions and the Philologist

  • argument: The agenda and research goals of philologists need to be kept in mind—even if modified and enhanced—when using digital technologies to create, edit, and study texts.

Markup

  • argument: XML (and within it especially TEI) offers both a solid standard for text markup as well as limitations which have to be managed in a collaborative framework. Depth of markup may be a hindrance as well as an advantage of this technology.

11.00 Coffee

11.30 Session 2: technologies

eScience/VRE/Grid

  • argument: the eScience methodologies offer a powerful technological framework for digital research. These technologies need to be exploited for digital authoring, collaborative text editing, wide dissemination, and effective processing of available texts.
  • responder: Nathan Lea

Depth and Scale

  • argument: The computational analysis of digital editions needs both a large enough corpus and a degree of deep encoding—any given textual project needs to find its own balance between these two. The field as a whole and any repository need to be able to accept and handle texts with a minimal layer of markup as well as more richly encoded versions.
  • responder: Melissa Terras

Collaboration

  • argument: Large-scale digital projects make it possible, and even essential, that scholars work together to achieve multi-disciplinary work that is entirely within no one person's expertise. There are managerial and technological issues to be addressed with any collaborative project.
  • responder: Simon Mahony

13.00 Lunch

14.00 Session 3: protocols

Licensing/Open Source

  • argument: Scholarship has always depended on transparency and availability of source texts and arguments, and these features need to be carried over into legal licensing of digital editions.

Registries/referencing

  • argument: The proliferation of different kinds of critical digital texts need to be identified according to a standard registry—even if the hosting is distributed—if protocols of referencing are to be usefully consistent.

Authority/Peer Review

  • argument: Digital editions, particularly in a collaborative framework, need both traditional means of quality assurance and new approaches.
  • responder: Dolores Iorizzo

15.30 Tea

16.00 Session 4: open discussion

Summary and further topics to be discussed

  • chair: Juan Garcés

Values of traditional scholarship

  • chair: Brian Fuchs

Future Strategies

  • chair: Gregory Crane

17.30 Ends

Personal tools