Gotta have a fondness for a critical, scholarly work that refers to its author-of-study by his initals. The Mark Twain Archive does a particularly good job of picking up on aspects of "MT"'s works that are of high interest in both the casual and scholarly communities. The section on Representations of Jim, for instance, gathers together illustrations of Jim over the various editions of the book, often providing side-by-sides of two illustrations by the same author. While it might have been nice to see all the illustrations side-by-side, the linear order of the discussion is clear and easy to follow.
The only quibble I have with the design of the archive as a whole is that navigation through some parts (ie, to the bibliography, or back to the home page) is controlled by two or three unlabled pictures at the bottom of the page, which are not necessarily intuitive, particularly for the more casual Twain reader. The more casual organization fit the more casual tone of the piece as a whole, though.
This is an interesting site to get lost in. The historical context for the various works included is fascinating. The layout and lack of certain navigational devices (ie, "breadcrumb" trails, continues tabs or menus) definitely leads to wandering rather than pointed searching. It seems to be an archive to be accessed by someone interested in Twain, perhaps someone researching a specific book or stage production. It has some good information on aspects of Twain's work that would be viewed as unusual today, such as the instructions to subscription sales-people, but that and other parts of the site which are buried several layers deep are sort of prizes for intrepid searchers.
Verdict: well written and witty, with what appears to be good scholarship, but the movement between items can be a bit "jumpy" and doesn't facilitate back-tracking to an earlier branching point for complex meandering. The search function itself is less prominent than one would expect [two layers deep], and it's sometimes difficult to trace quotes to their sources or find the bibliography to certain pages.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Ricardo Del Campo
When I first approached the Wikipedia assignment, I didn't have a clear idea of what I wanted to edit. I checked out the section on "Printing," and couldn't find a way to edit the main entry. I was able to add Gaskell's bibliography text to the "Further Reading." I think my difficulty trying to edit that page may have something to do with its nature as a "funnel" page, meant to lead to other articles. Or maybe I'm just unfamiliar with Wikipedia.
On my second try, I attempted to find a page that was a. much smaller, and b. obviously needing elaboration. Both of these criteria were fulfilled by Richard Fields (printer). I was particularly amused by the statement, "In Field's era, the trades of printer and publisher were to some significant degree separate activities: booksellers acted as publishers and commissioned printers to do the requisite printing. Field concentrated more on printing than publishing: of the roughly 295 books he printed in his career, he was publisher of perhaps 112, while the rest were published by other stationers.[3]This is apparently supported by a 1931 article in the Library, but the idea that -- even working with the assumption that this guy has his numbers right -- by publishing "only" 112 books this was somehow a minor part of Field's business is pretty ludicrous, even "in Field's era."
The majority of the article centers not on the actual activities of said Richard Field, but on his association with Shakespeare. All the links at the bottom of the page center around Shakespeare folios, even those of other printers. So for this project, I set about correcting one or two of the egregious errors-by-omission. To avoid having to dig up citation materials buried in my computer, I settled for inserting a few notes on Field's activities as a protestant propagandist and his Spanish publications/printings. I also corrected the mistaken "question" that Jacqueline Vautrollier, his first wife, was possibly the daughter of his former boss, and not Thomas Vautrollier's widow. Given the lack of information on this well known printer, it's not surprising that J. Vautrollier, also a printer, doesn't have her own page.
On my second try, I attempted to find a page that was a. much smaller, and b. obviously needing elaboration. Both of these criteria were fulfilled by Richard Fields (printer). I was particularly amused by the statement, "In Field's era, the trades of printer and publisher were to some significant degree separate activities: booksellers acted as publishers and commissioned printers to do the requisite printing. Field concentrated more on printing than publishing: of the roughly 295 books he printed in his career, he was publisher of perhaps 112, while the rest were published by other stationers.[3]This is apparently supported by a 1931 article in the Library, but the idea that -- even working with the assumption that this guy has his numbers right -- by publishing "only" 112 books this was somehow a minor part of Field's business is pretty ludicrous, even "in Field's era."
The majority of the article centers not on the actual activities of said Richard Field, but on his association with Shakespeare. All the links at the bottom of the page center around Shakespeare folios, even those of other printers. So for this project, I set about correcting one or two of the egregious errors-by-omission. To avoid having to dig up citation materials buried in my computer, I settled for inserting a few notes on Field's activities as a protestant propagandist and his Spanish publications/printings. I also corrected the mistaken "question" that Jacqueline Vautrollier, his first wife, was possibly the daughter of his former boss, and not Thomas Vautrollier's widow. Given the lack of information on this well known printer, it's not surprising that J. Vautrollier, also a printer, doesn't have her own page.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Online Pedagogy
A pencil is a tool. It can be used for good (taking notes, doodling in your margins, shading in all the o's in a handout) or evil (stabbing your classmate.... Don't laugh, this happened to a student in one of my mom's 4th grade classes).
Online and computer-oriented pedagogical tools are tools as well. They are as good or evil as the pedagogy and thought put behind their use. Admittedly, it's harder to stab your classmate in a sensitive region with a power-point slide, but their use to convey information is limited mainly by the imagination and time of the slide-show creator.
I'll admit to being vaguely annoyed by what I see as the technological bias of power-point. Most of the preset backgrounds are vaguely techy looking. This annoyance is largely because my main use for powerpoint comes in classes titled things like "The Manuscript Book" and "Travel Narratives of the Renaissance." There are few preset background and color-combinations that truly evoke manuscript books, with the possible exception of the marble-background and the one which somewhat awkwardly resembles a wooden desk. Since I mainly tend to use this software to display comparative images of pages (as in "here you may see f.21r and f.21v, with the show-through of the verdigris pigment..."), what I need is a software that allows me to put two images side by side in a temporal sequence, and honestly, PowerPoint does that quite well. I think Edward Tufte's objections should not necessarily rest soley on the shoulders of PowerPoint, but on all the instructors and employers who threw the neophyte in the ocean and said, "I want a PowerPoint by Friday. Go." Without instruction, the unimaginative, rushed, and just plain bad PowerPoint Presentation is to be expected. At some point in the educational process, it would behoove us to tell students how to use this tool, just like at some point in our ancient past someone told us how to hold a pencil.
Distance or Online instruction, likewise, constitutes a set of tools which can be used well or ill, depending on teh pedagogy behind the tool. Some tools are useful for providing a basic background understanding to a range of users. My current favorite example is the Moma's What is a Print flash animation. It conveys a fairly simple definition of several artistic techniques in a way which is moderately interactive. It will not teach you to make beautiful etchings on your own, but this is not it's purpose. And this, I suppose, is the real annoyance David Noble is trying to get at -- by comparing Online classes to oldfashioned mail-order diploma mills -- that these online tools are misrepresenting themselves as the equivalent of an in-person education with a dedicated instructor.
Because without the directed pedagogy of an instructor, these tools cannot be as responsive to student needs as a class run by a competent pedagogue. Standardized content cannot adjust to the pace of the student. It cannot slow down when a class "isn't getting it." It cannot speed up when things are going smoothly. Standardization can't jive with responsiveness, the two qualities are antithetical. This doesn't mean that online classwork cannot supplement learning at a distance.
I recently found a really neat class website for an interdisciplinary class at the University of Texas. I found this tool through a google search, while I was looking for a basic definition of "sublime poetry." This tool, however, provides a greater context that I had anticipated for this term, and I like the juxtaposition of genres and disciplines it proposes. I might find a way to incorporate this into my own pedagogy at some point in the future. Do I think I get the same experience from exploring this website as someone who has taken Dr. Lisa L. Moore's class? No. But I do think it adds to my understanding of the period from 1700 to 1832 that it covers, and thus is educational for me.
I do wonder what we should make of the fine-print on the website, from a pedagogical point of view: "This site was created by Lisa L. Moore, Associate Professor of English and Women's and Gender Studies at The University of Texas at Austin . It is for use by University of Texas students and scholars and is password-protected. Please do not reproduce material from this site without permission." I feel ok posting the link to it here on this blog, as I am a "scholar," albeit one no longer associated with UT (does being an alumna count?) and I'm not, technically, reproducing any of the material. I can't for the life of me figure out what she means by "password protected" as I can see most of the site without problems... I think there's one or two dead links. Is this just a covering-the-butt-note? How much does one expose oneself legally when one is pedagogical online?
Online and computer-oriented pedagogical tools are tools as well. They are as good or evil as the pedagogy and thought put behind their use. Admittedly, it's harder to stab your classmate in a sensitive region with a power-point slide, but their use to convey information is limited mainly by the imagination and time of the slide-show creator.
I'll admit to being vaguely annoyed by what I see as the technological bias of power-point. Most of the preset backgrounds are vaguely techy looking. This annoyance is largely because my main use for powerpoint comes in classes titled things like "The Manuscript Book" and "Travel Narratives of the Renaissance." There are few preset background and color-combinations that truly evoke manuscript books, with the possible exception of the marble-background and the one which somewhat awkwardly resembles a wooden desk. Since I mainly tend to use this software to display comparative images of pages (as in "here you may see f.21r and f.21v, with the show-through of the verdigris pigment..."), what I need is a software that allows me to put two images side by side in a temporal sequence, and honestly, PowerPoint does that quite well. I think Edward Tufte's objections should not necessarily rest soley on the shoulders of PowerPoint, but on all the instructors and employers who threw the neophyte in the ocean and said, "I want a PowerPoint by Friday. Go." Without instruction, the unimaginative, rushed, and just plain bad PowerPoint Presentation is to be expected. At some point in the educational process, it would behoove us to tell students how to use this tool, just like at some point in our ancient past someone told us how to hold a pencil.
Distance or Online instruction, likewise, constitutes a set of tools which can be used well or ill, depending on teh pedagogy behind the tool. Some tools are useful for providing a basic background understanding to a range of users. My current favorite example is the Moma's What is a Print flash animation. It conveys a fairly simple definition of several artistic techniques in a way which is moderately interactive. It will not teach you to make beautiful etchings on your own, but this is not it's purpose. And this, I suppose, is the real annoyance David Noble is trying to get at -- by comparing Online classes to oldfashioned mail-order diploma mills -- that these online tools are misrepresenting themselves as the equivalent of an in-person education with a dedicated instructor.
Because without the directed pedagogy of an instructor, these tools cannot be as responsive to student needs as a class run by a competent pedagogue. Standardized content cannot adjust to the pace of the student. It cannot slow down when a class "isn't getting it." It cannot speed up when things are going smoothly. Standardization can't jive with responsiveness, the two qualities are antithetical. This doesn't mean that online classwork cannot supplement learning at a distance.
I recently found a really neat class website for an interdisciplinary class at the University of Texas. I found this tool through a google search, while I was looking for a basic definition of "sublime poetry." This tool, however, provides a greater context that I had anticipated for this term, and I like the juxtaposition of genres and disciplines it proposes. I might find a way to incorporate this into my own pedagogy at some point in the future. Do I think I get the same experience from exploring this website as someone who has taken Dr. Lisa L. Moore's class? No. But I do think it adds to my understanding of the period from 1700 to 1832 that it covers, and thus is educational for me.
I do wonder what we should make of the fine-print on the website, from a pedagogical point of view: "This site was created by Lisa L. Moore, Associate Professor of English and Women's and Gender Studies at The University of Texas at Austin . It is for use by University of Texas students and scholars and is password-protected. Please do not reproduce material from this site without permission." I feel ok posting the link to it here on this blog, as I am a "scholar," albeit one no longer associated with UT (does being an alumna count?) and I'm not, technically, reproducing any of the material. I can't for the life of me figure out what she means by "password protected" as I can see most of the site without problems... I think there's one or two dead links. Is this just a covering-the-butt-note? How much does one expose oneself legally when one is pedagogical online?
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
TextArc: The Tool That Wasn't
TextArc, which I've encountered before in a bibliography class, is one of those tools that makes you go "gee Whiz, now that I've got all this computing power, I can do amazing things with those stodgy old books."
But I'm not sure I understand fully what these amazing things are, or how best to use them. Part of this is my issue with running this incredibly memory intensive program; the first five times I tried it crashed my browser. I finally got the Alice in Wonderland to work, but I never did get The Three Muskateers to do so. I didn't realize there was a sound component until I read down the main page -- mostly because I browse with the sound off in my office, so as not to annoy my office-mates when I'm too lazy to dig out my headphones.
My ultimate problem with TextArc functionally boils down to a lack of imagination. I'm sure that if I were to study a text, and then run it through the program (on a much faster computer than mine), I would be able to see the patterns that should be showing up. Currently it looks like a really neato-screen saver, along the lines of Electric Sheep and I'm not sure I'm getting the logic behind what it's doing. I would be interested in a "guided tour" of the TextArc program; I found that I got more out of the Still Images section than running the program itself, because it came with more indepth explanations and didn't kick you out for accidentally clicking on something.
Upshot: I can see where this tool would be useful for a critical examination of a well-known text once one had time to learn how to use the features. My automatic reaction, when attempting to explore anew online feature, is to randomly click on things that look interesting. I suppose this is similar to babies putting everything they find in their mouthes to see what it tastes like, but it usually works. It is not, however, useful behavior for exploring TextArc, and as a result (well, plus the 5-minute-plus load times and the five-or-so crashes) left me feeling rather frustrated. My final reaction: Gee Whiz, I feel incompetent.
But I'm not sure I understand fully what these amazing things are, or how best to use them. Part of this is my issue with running this incredibly memory intensive program; the first five times I tried it crashed my browser. I finally got the Alice in Wonderland to work, but I never did get The Three Muskateers to do so. I didn't realize there was a sound component until I read down the main page -- mostly because I browse with the sound off in my office, so as not to annoy my office-mates when I'm too lazy to dig out my headphones.
My ultimate problem with TextArc functionally boils down to a lack of imagination. I'm sure that if I were to study a text, and then run it through the program (on a much faster computer than mine), I would be able to see the patterns that should be showing up. Currently it looks like a really neato-screen saver, along the lines of Electric Sheep and I'm not sure I'm getting the logic behind what it's doing. I would be interested in a "guided tour" of the TextArc program; I found that I got more out of the Still Images section than running the program itself, because it came with more indepth explanations and didn't kick you out for accidentally clicking on something.
Upshot: I can see where this tool would be useful for a critical examination of a well-known text once one had time to learn how to use the features. My automatic reaction, when attempting to explore anew online feature, is to randomly click on things that look interesting. I suppose this is similar to babies putting everything they find in their mouthes to see what it tastes like, but it usually works. It is not, however, useful behavior for exploring TextArc, and as a result (well, plus the 5-minute-plus load times and the five-or-so crashes) left me feeling rather frustrated. My final reaction: Gee Whiz, I feel incompetent.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Hypertext as persuasion
As part of our discussion of hypertexts and Choose Your Own Adventure Books, I found a link to an interesting BoingBoing article. For another neat example, see this image that I found from a comment on the BoingBoing article.
The mapping process here is what I was trying to talk about in class; trees that allow us to immediately jump to different branches of an argument. While this might not be good entertainment in a CYOA book, this is primarily because CYOA is about entertainment, whereas persuasive hypertexts would highly benefit from this flexibility.
The mapping process here is what I was trying to talk about in class; trees that allow us to immediately jump to different branches of an argument. While this might not be good entertainment in a CYOA book, this is primarily because CYOA is about entertainment, whereas persuasive hypertexts would highly benefit from this flexibility.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Stealing to feed the media appetite.
Several of my friends were willing to spill on their legal, semilegal, and pretty-illegal collecting habits, so long as I agreed to leave them anonymous or, in one case, identify only by their job. I'll note that the lengthiest answers were from librarians, which, since I was conducting some of the survey on my other blog, lead to comments such as "librarians are the biggest bunch of pirates i ever did see" and "information wants to be FREEEEEEEEEEEE."
Friend 1:
"I regularly rip CDs (of my own, my friends and Public Library) to my computer and from there to my mp3 player, which I believe is a double-violation of the strictest reading of DRM laws...
I justify this because it's MINE (library materials are also "mine" in the way that they are also everyone else's) and I should be able to enjoy music/audio books the way I want when I want if on computer, mp3 player or cd.
I also share these items at will to other people who might like them, and I snag music/video/books from people when they have things that I might like without regard to whether or not those people have acquired the items legally. Gran Torino was an awesome movie. It was even better snuggled up in bed instead of in an uncomfortable movie theather.
On a tangent: If I recommend a book to someone, and they like it, they often pass it around. I bought Predictably Irrational and after I read it, it passed through my mom, dad, sister, best friend and both her roommates. (the second has it still and I'll get it back from her eventually.) All that in less than a year. The same happened with My Jesus Year, My Father's Paradise and Traffic I feel like music and video stuff is kinda like that, except I know that the digital copies being easy and free and non-unique bit makes it totally unlike that."
Friend 2, "I frequently take music from friends -
and I have no other reason other than because I'm cheap."
Friend 3, the School Librarian (phone interview):
Pirates many things, but with lots of justification:
Music: pirates music that he already owns, but for whatever reason cannot put onto his computer, where he listens to most of his music. Otherwise, any music collection which is not released in the US is fairgame; British albums in particular.
TV/Movies: very similar to music, only what is not readily available in US (ie BBC), although he acknowledges that if he wanted to pay $$$$ he could probably get BBC as a premium channel.
Images: Attempts to use fair-use images from Flikr for things like business cards and classroom presentaitons. Has no compunctions about pirating porn. (he went on for a while. This was the short version. Will try to update later).
Friend 4:
"Personally I just pirate software that would in theory let me pirate movies, but that I just use to let me actually use my movies... I can explain in more depth if anyone wants..."
There seems to be a consensus that if you buy a piece of music/movie/item once, but the restrictions do not allow you to use the item as you want (ie, usually on the computer) that it is morally, if not legally, ok to rip it, either from your copy or anohter's copy.
Friend 1:
"I regularly rip CDs (of my own, my friends and Public Library) to my computer and from there to my mp3 player, which I believe is a double-violation of the strictest reading of DRM laws...
I justify this because it's MINE (library materials are also "mine" in the way that they are also everyone else's) and I should be able to enjoy music/audio books the way I want when I want if on computer, mp3 player or cd.
I also share these items at will to other people who might like them, and I snag music/video/books from people when they have things that I might like without regard to whether or not those people have acquired the items legally. Gran Torino was an awesome movie. It was even better snuggled up in bed instead of in an uncomfortable movie theather.
On a tangent: If I recommend a book to someone, and they like it, they often pass it around. I bought Predictably Irrational and after I read it, it passed through my mom, dad, sister, best friend and both her roommates. (the second has it still and I'll get it back from her eventually.) All that in less than a year. The same happened with My Jesus Year, My Father's Paradise and Traffic I feel like music and video stuff is kinda like that, except I know that the digital copies being easy and free and non-unique bit makes it totally unlike that."
Friend 2, "I frequently take music from friends -
and I have no other reason other than because I'm cheap."
Friend 3, the School Librarian (phone interview):
Pirates many things, but with lots of justification:
Music: pirates music that he already owns, but for whatever reason cannot put onto his computer, where he listens to most of his music. Otherwise, any music collection which is not released in the US is fairgame; British albums in particular.
TV/Movies: very similar to music, only what is not readily available in US (ie BBC), although he acknowledges that if he wanted to pay $$$$ he could probably get BBC as a premium channel.
Images: Attempts to use fair-use images from Flikr for things like business cards and classroom presentaitons. Has no compunctions about pirating porn. (he went on for a while. This was the short version. Will try to update later).
Friend 4:
"Personally I just pirate software that would in theory let me pirate movies, but that I just use to let me actually use my movies... I can explain in more depth if anyone wants..."
There seems to be a consensus that if you buy a piece of music/movie/item once, but the restrictions do not allow you to use the item as you want (ie, usually on the computer) that it is morally, if not legally, ok to rip it, either from your copy or anohter's copy.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Ganked from the LJ of a friend of mine, because it seemed relevant in the face of our launching into learning how to code:
Profanity in the Comments.
"When we created mozilla.org and released (most of) the source code to Netscape Confusicator 4.x, Netscape's lawyers made us go through a big "sanitization" process on the source code. Largely this consisted of making sure we had the legal rights to all the code we were releasing, and making sure every file had proper and accurate copyright statements; but they also made us take out all the dirty words. Specifically, "any text containing vulgar or offensive words or expressions; any text that might be slanderous or libelous to individuals and/or institutions." " © 2004 Jamie Zawinski
Profanity in the Comments.
"When we created mozilla.org and released (most of) the source code to Netscape Confusicator 4.x, Netscape's lawyers made us go through a big "sanitization" process on the source code. Largely this consisted of making sure we had the legal rights to all the code we were releasing, and making sure every file had proper and accurate copyright statements; but they also made us take out all the dirty words. Specifically, "any text containing vulgar or offensive words or expressions; any text that might be slanderous or libelous to individuals and/or institutions." " © 2004 Jamie Zawinski
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Digital Humanities: History and Future
I find myself having more difficulty with this assignment than I originally expected. This post may sound like a book-report in search of a point, but I think the usability of these sources is inherently informing of their content. If Humanities Computing is the act of putting the output of human creativity into a computer or other electronic device in order to save it for future generations, analyze its content, or cause it to be more easily and effectively accessed and utilized, then it is only successful to the extent that it fulfills these goals.
The readings seem to aim to provide a history of the field, and I actually expected Fraser’s “A Hypertextual History of Humanities Computing,” would be more like the University of Michigan’s timeline for digital technologies and preservation: (this is a really great at-a-glance timeline for technology) but focusing on technologies applied to the humanities. While clearly not finished yet (it currently has an extremely fragmentary feel) this seems like an accessible mode to present this information. The fragmentary nature of the writing makes me wonder how complete the information itself is; are there significant gaps in the units that are up, or is it just waiting for a final read-over?
The mapping exercise (found here), on the other hand, creates a visual overview of the many related fields touched on and influenced by Humanities computing. This visualization is necessarily cramped by the sheer amount of information it attempts to maintain. This is a system of visualization that would benefit greatly from the 3d technologies like those employed by the The Visual Thesaurus, or even the color-dimensions of other modeling software.
I feel like an extensive reading of the ListServ would, eventually, also give an overview of the field, but it isn’t set up for that manner of information retrieval. Like any topical discussion among specialists, the ListServ is chock full of jargon which I’m sure professionals in the digital humanities field understand. Perhaps ironically, my experience in library science makes some of the posts perhaps more obscure than they would be otherwise – I feel like the terminology is just off enough that I’m missing something important while skimming through the archive. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be an effective search method for the archive, and the ability to organize “by thread” is only marginally helpful. There’s something that looks like a word-search under ArchTracker Display, but I couldn’t get it to work. Some sort of tagging system would be ideal.
The field of Digital Humanities/ Humanities Computing is about stretching our mental model of humanities to encompass a wider range of display, access, and analysis models. We understand how to access these new forms by employing established mental models (of how to use/examine/analyze “humanities” objects. New technologies allow us to stretch these models by creating new analogies to other, established models (folders, surfing, journaling, forums, classified ads). I feel like the current repositories for digital humanities texts about digital humanities (Ur-Humanities texts?) are currently not living up to the full potential of the medium.
The readings seem to aim to provide a history of the field, and I actually expected Fraser’s “A Hypertextual History of Humanities Computing,” would be more like the University of Michigan’s timeline for digital technologies and preservation: (this is a really great at-a-glance timeline for technology) but focusing on technologies applied to the humanities. While clearly not finished yet (it currently has an extremely fragmentary feel) this seems like an accessible mode to present this information. The fragmentary nature of the writing makes me wonder how complete the information itself is; are there significant gaps in the units that are up, or is it just waiting for a final read-over?
The mapping exercise (found here), on the other hand, creates a visual overview of the many related fields touched on and influenced by Humanities computing. This visualization is necessarily cramped by the sheer amount of information it attempts to maintain. This is a system of visualization that would benefit greatly from the 3d technologies like those employed by the The Visual Thesaurus, or even the color-dimensions of other modeling software.
I feel like an extensive reading of the ListServ would, eventually, also give an overview of the field, but it isn’t set up for that manner of information retrieval. Like any topical discussion among specialists, the ListServ is chock full of jargon which I’m sure professionals in the digital humanities field understand. Perhaps ironically, my experience in library science makes some of the posts perhaps more obscure than they would be otherwise – I feel like the terminology is just off enough that I’m missing something important while skimming through the archive. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be an effective search method for the archive, and the ability to organize “by thread” is only marginally helpful. There’s something that looks like a word-search under ArchTracker Display, but I couldn’t get it to work. Some sort of tagging system would be ideal.
The field of Digital Humanities/ Humanities Computing is about stretching our mental model of humanities to encompass a wider range of display, access, and analysis models. We understand how to access these new forms by employing established mental models (of how to use/examine/analyze “humanities” objects. New technologies allow us to stretch these models by creating new analogies to other, established models (folders, surfing, journaling, forums, classified ads). I feel like the current repositories for digital humanities texts about digital humanities (Ur-Humanities texts?) are currently not living up to the full potential of the medium.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Preliminary Post
Testing out the whole professional blogging for ENG 5933; This post is just to get a feel for Blogger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)