| 9.30 |
Coffee |
| 9.50 |
Introduction |
| 10.00 |
Session 1: Critical editions |
|
Research Agenda/Critical Apparatus |
|
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. Presenter: Charlotte Roueché.Responder: Stephen Oakley |
|
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. Presenter: Gabriel Bodard. Responder: Notis Toufexis. |
| 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 digitial authoring,
collaborative text editing, wide dissemination, and effective processing of available
texts. Presenter: Stuart Dunn. Responder: Nathan Lea. |
|
Depth vs. 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. Presenter: Gregory Crane. 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. Presenter: Ross Scaife. Responder: Brian Fuchs. |
| 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.Presenter: Sayeed Choudhury. Responder: tbc. |
|
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. Presenter: Neel Smith. Responder: Juan Garcés. |
|
Authority/peer review |
|
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. |
