DOCSLIB.ORG

The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation Manuscript Submitted to Johns Hopkins University Press By: Trevor Owens June, 2017 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation Manuscript Submitted to Johns Hopkins University Press By: Trevor Owens June, 2017 2 1 The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation Manuscript Submitted to Johns Hopkins University Press By: Trevor Owens June, 2017 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 1. Beyond Digital Hype and Digital Anxiety 5 2. Artifact, Information, or Folklore: Preservation’s Divergent Lineages 11 3. Understanding Digital Objects 26 4. Challenges & Opportunities of Digital Preservation 39 5. The Craft of Digital Preservation 50 6. Preservation Intent & Collection Development 56 7. Managing Copies and Formats 70 8. Arranging and Describing Digital Objects 85 9. Enabling Multimodal Access and Use 104 10. Conclusions: Tools for Looking Forward 122 Bibliography 131 3 Acknowledgements I spent a year working on this book, but it represents the culmination of about a decade of trying to make my own sense of digital preservation. As such, I have a lot of people to acknowledge. The strengths of this book come from the international digital preservation community I’ve been welcomed into. Its’ weaknesses are my own. I first learned about digital preservation in my time at the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. Before he passed away, Roy made an extensive and lasting impression those of us lucky enough to work for him. My constant hope is that the compassion, dedication, and pragmatism Roy brought into every day of his work at the Center comes through in my own. My understanding and appreciation for issues in digital history and digital preservation were sparked by four years of discussion and collaboration with colleges there; Dan Cohen, Josh Greenberg, Sean Takats, Tom Scheinfeldt, Sharon Leon, Sheila Brennan, Dave Lester, Jeremy Boggs, Jim Safley, Kari Kraus, Connie Moon Sehat, Miles Kelly, Mindy Lawrence, Jon Lesser, Kris Kelly, Ken Albers, Faolan Cheslack-Postava, John Flatness, Dan Stillman, and Christopher Hamner. It was in Dan’s digital history graduate seminar that I first really delved into the issues around digital preservation in any formal way. When Sharon couldn’t make it to a Library of Congress NDIIPP meeting I went instead and ended getting introduced to many of my future colleagues. Josh generously offered substantive edits on my undergraduate thesis, was always happy to chat about science and technology studies, and ultimately was a my reference applied to work for the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP). When I joined the NDIIPP team in 2010 I had no idea how lucky I was. I was able to join a team of some of the smartest folks in the world working on digital preservation. The best part was that they were surprisingly down to earth. On my first day, D an Chudnov (who’s Emperor’s New Repository article remains one of best pieces of writing on digital preservation) t old me “You can love the Library of Congress but it won’t ever love you back.” I t’s true. Massive institutions like the LC can feel like cold bureaucracies. However, those c hallenges can c reate bonds and friendships that last. T he best treasures of the Library of Congress are found in it’s staff. My colleagues in NDIIPP, and across the institution, are the people who taught me both w hat digital preservation is and how it actually happens. To that end, I owe a considerable t hanks to; Martha Anderson, Abbey Potter, Michelle Gallinger, Jane Mandelbaum, Dan Chudnov, Butch Lazorcheck, Erin Engle, Leslie Johnston, Jefferson Bailey, Abbie Grotke, E d Summers, Nicholas Taylor, Chris Thatcher, Niki Saylor, Chris Adams, Thomas Padilla, Emily Reynolds, G loria Gonzalez, Jimi Jones, Bertram Lyons, Kate Murray, Caroline Arms, Carl Fleischhauer, Caitlin Hammer, Andrew Cassidy-Amstutz, Kathleen O'Neill, Meg McAleer, Moryma Aydelott, Beth Dulabahn, Kate Zwaard, David Brunton, and many others. While working for NDIIPP I was able to serve as the first co-chair of the National Digital Stewardship Alliance’s digital preservation working group. The monthly conference calls and discussions of what was and wasn’t working factored heavily into shaping ideas behind this book. While everyone involved in NDSA related meetings and events has had an impact on my thinking I would like to specifically mention; Micah Altmen, Andrea Goethals, Andy Johnson, 4 Lori Emmerson, Jason Eppink, Amanda Brennan, Euan Cochran, Megan Phillips, Karen Carani, Dragan Espenschied, Cal Lee, David Rosenthal, Vicky Reich, Katherine Skinner, Nick Krabbenhoeft, Robin Ruggaber, Cory Snavely, Peter Krogh, Micheal Edson, Mike Giarlo, David Pearson, Bethany Nowviskie, Robert Horton, Chris Lacinak, Kara Van Malssen, Abby Smith Rumsey, Howard Besser, Don Watters, Doug Reside, Ian Bogost, Henry Lowood, Jason Scott, Richard Pierce-Moses, Mark Matienzo, Maureen Callahan, Jaime Schumacher, Stacey Erdman, Seb Chan, and Aaron Straup Cope. I would also like to thank people who took the time to comment on the public drafts of this book I shared on my blog; Bertram Lyons, Alan Liu, Chris Adams, Karl-Rainer Blumenthal, Porter Olsen, Matthew Kirschenbaum, Jon Ippolito, Thomas Padilla, Jessica Tieman, Glynn Edwards, Andrew Jackson, Euan Cochrane, Shira Peltzman, Clarissa Ceglio, Annie Johnson, and Steven Lubar. The book is significantly stronger as a result of their input. Across all of these places and spaces I’ve been lucky to have a set of mentors who have taught me so much about how cultural institutions work; Roy Rosenzweig, Dan Cohen, Josh Greenberg, Martha Anderson, Carl Fleischhauer, Kim Sheridan, Richard Staley, and Maura Marx. Lastly, and most importantly, I would like to thank and acknowledge Marjee Chmiel. My wife. My constant companion. You read the, often, incoherent first drafts of this book and helped me make them less so. You did that just as you did with my cover letters and resumes for each of the jobs I’ve mentioned. You brought me to D.C. from Wisconsin. You are so present in my life and in my work that it is impossible to articulate specific things to attribute to you. I do know that I really have no idea who I would be or what I would be doing outside of the life we live together. We did our dissertations together. Each taking the turn powering through writing and research while the other would make dinner, wash the dishes, and walk the dogs. Your accomplishments inspire me. Your insights refine my thinking. Your thoughtfulness and compassion inspire me to work to be a better person. 5 Beyond Digital Hype and Digital Anxiety "Life is short and craft is long." – Hippocrates (5th Century BCE) “A problem has been detected and Windows has been shut down to prevent damage to your computer" – BsoD (Late 20th Century) “The Dream thrives on generalization, on limiting the number of possible questions, on privileging immediate answers.” – Ta-Nehisi Coates (2016) A summit on digital preservation at the Library of Congress in the early 2000s brought together leaders from industry and the cultural heritage sector to work through the mounting challenges in ensuring long- term access to digital information. One participant from a technology company proposed something like “Why don’t we just hoover it all up and shoot it into space.” The “it” in this case being any and all historically significant digital content. Many participants laughed, but it wasn’t intended as a joke. Many individuals have, and continue to seek similar (although generally not quite as literal) “moon-shots,” singular technical solutions to the problem of enduring access to digital information. More than a decade later, we find ourselves amid the same stories and imagined solutions we have heard for the last (at least) 20 years. For the public, there is a belief (and worry) that if something is on the Internet, it will be around forever. At the same time, warnings of an impending “digital dark age,” where records of the recent past become completely lost or inaccessible, frequently appear in the popular press. It is as if digital information will last forever but also, somehow, disappear dramatically all at once. The hype cycles of digital technology, combined with a basic lack of understanding about digital media leave people ill-equipped to sort through the hype and anxiety. Yet, I’ve found that when I tell people that I work on digital preservation and explain what I mean by that term and the work, most people respond something along the lines of “Gosh! I never even thought about that!” For many executives, policy makers and administrators new to digital preservation it seems like the world needs someone to design some super system that can “solve” the problem of digital preservation. The wisdom of the cohort of digital preservation practitioners in libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural memory institutions who have been doing this work for half a century suggests this is an illusory dream. To them, the recurring idea of the singular technological super system that “solves the problem” is distraction not worth chasing. It’s also something that diverts resources from those doing the work. Working to ensure long-term access to digital information is not a problem for a singular tool to solve. It is a complex field with a significant set of ethical dimensions. It is a vocation. It is only possible through the application of resources from our cultural institutions. This book is intended as a point of entry into the theory and craft of digital preservation as it has emerged in practice. The purpose of this book is to offer a path for getting beyond the hyperbole and the anxiety of “the digital” and establish a baseline of practice. To do this, one needs to first unpack what we mean by preservation. It is then critical to establish a basic knowledge of the nature of digital media and digital information. With these in hand, anyone can make significant and practical advances toward mitigating the most pressing risks of digital loss.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fixing Historic Preservation: a Constructive Critique of “Significance”
    Peer Reviewed Title: Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of "Significance" [Research and Debate] Journal Issue: Places, 16(1) Author: Mason, Randall Publication Date: 2004 Publication Info: Places Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/74q0j4j2 Acknowledgements: This article was originally produced in Places Journal. To subscribe, visit www.places-journal.org. For reprint information, contact [email protected]. Keywords: places, placemaking, architecture, environment, landscape, urban design, public realm, planning, design, research, debate, historic, preservation, contructive, critique, significance, Randall Mason Copyright Information: All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Fixing Historic Preservation: A Constructive Critique of “Significance” Randall Mason The idea of “significance” is exceed- Second, once judgments are made projects that tell their particular sto- ingly important to the practice of about a site, its significance is regarded ries. The broadening of preservation historic preservation. In significance, as largely fixed. Such inertia needs to from its curatorial roots has been a preservationists pack all their theory, be overcome, and
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    This PDF is a simplified version of the original article published in Internet Archaeology. All links also go to the online version. Please cite this as: Nicholson, C., Fernandez, R. and Irwin, J. 2021 Digital Archaeological Data in the Wild West: the challenge of practising responsible digital data archiving and access in the United States, Internet Archaeology 58. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.58.22 Digital Archaeological Data in the Wild West: the challenge of practising responsible digital data archiving and access in the United States Christopher Nicholson, Rachel Fernandez and Jessica Irwin Summary Archaeology in the United States is conducted by a number of different sorts of entities under a variety of legal mandates that lack uniform standards for data archiving. The difficulty of accessing data from projects in which one was not directly involved indicates an apparent reluctance to archive raw data and supplemental information with digital repositories to be reused in the future. There is hope that additional legislation, guidelines from professional organisations, and educational efforts will change these practices. 1. Introduction Though we are well into the 21st century, responsible digital archiving of archaeological data in the United States is not common practice. Digital archiving of cultural resource management reports in State Historic Preservation Offices, where they are often available by request though perhaps at a cost, is common; however, digitally archiving the datasets and other supporting materials that went into the creation of those documents is not. Though a vocal minority advocates for responsible digital archiving practices (Kansa and Kansa 2013; 2018; Kansa et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Laws and Regulations Requiring Curation of Digital Archaeological Documents and Data
    Federal Laws and Regulations Requiring Curation of Digital Archaeological Documents and Data Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC Prepared for: Arizona State University October 25th, 2012 © 2012 Arizona State University. All rights reserved. This report by Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC describes and analyzes federal requirements for the access to and long-term preservation of digital archaeological data. We conclude that the relevant federal laws, regulations, and policies mandate that digital archaeological data generated by federal agencies must be deposited in an appropriate repository with the capability of providing appropriate long-term digital curation and accessibility to qualified users. Federal Agency Responsibilities for Preservation and Access to Archaeological Records in Digital Form Federal requirements for appropriate management of archaeological data are set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”), the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (“ARPA”), the regulations regarding curation of data promulgated pursuant to those statutes (36 C.F.R. 79), and the regulations promulgated by the National Archives and Records Administration (36 C.F.R. 1220.1-1220.20) that apply to all federal agencies. We discuss each of these authorities in turn. Statutory Authority: Maintenance of Archaeological Data Archaeological data can be generated from many sources, including investigations or studies undertaken for compliance with the NHPA, ARPA, and other environmental protection laws. The NHPA was adopted in 1966, and strongly
    [Show full text]
  • International Preservation Issues Number Seven International Preservation Issues Number Seven
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM THE 3-D’SOFPRESERVATION DISATERS, DISPLAYS, DIGITIZATION ACTES DU SYMPOSIUM INTERNATIONAL LA CONSERVATION EN TROIS DIMENSIONS CATASTROPHES, EXPOSITIONS, NUMÉRISATION Organisé par la Bibliothèque nationale de France avec la collaboration de l’IFLA Paris, 8-10 mars 2006 Ed. revised and updated by / Ed. revue et corrigée par Corine Koch, IFLA-PAC International Preservation Issues Number Seven International Preservation Issues Number Seven International Preservation Issues (IPI) is an IFLA-PAC (Preservation and Conservation) series that intends to complement PAC’s newsletter, International Preservation News (IPN) with reports on major preservation issues. IFLA-PAC Bibliothèque nationale de France Quai François-Mauriac 75706 Paris cedex 13 France Tél : + 33 (0) 1 53 79 59 70 Fax : + 33 (0) 1 53 79 59 80 e-mail: [email protected] IFLA-PAC Director e-mail: [email protected] Programme Officer ISBN-10 2-912 743-05-2 ISBN-13 978-2-912 743-05-3 ISSN 1562-305X Published 2006 by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) Core Activity on Preservation and Conservation (PAC). ∞ This publication is printed on permanent paper which meets the requirements of ISO standard: ISO 9706:1994 – Information and Documentation – Paper for Documents – Requirements for Permanence. © Copyright 2006 by IFLA-PAC. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transcribed in any form without permission of the publishers. Request for reproduction for non-commercial purposes, including
    [Show full text]
  • XS, S, M, L: Creative Text Generators of Different Scales
    XS, S, M, L Creative Text Generators of Different Scales Nick Montfort January 2012 TROPE–12–02 Abstract Creative text generation projects of different sizes (in terms of lines of code and length of development time) are described. “Extra-small,” “small,” “medium,” and “large” projects are discussed as participating in the practice of creative computing differently. Different ways in which these projects have circulated and are being used in the community of practice are identified. While large-scale projects have clearly been important in advancing creative text generation, the argument presented here is that the other types of projects are also valuable and that they are undervalued (particularly in computer science and strongly related fields) by current structures of higher education and academic communication – structures which could be changed. A technical report from © 2012 Nick Montfort The Trope Tank This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Massachusetts Institute of Technology Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. 77 Massachusetts Ave, 14N-233 To view a copy of this license, visit: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Cambridge, MA 02139 USA or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, http://trope-tank.mit.edu Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. 2 Introduction In S, M, L, XL, Rem Koolhaus discusses his realized and unrealized architectural projects, organizing them by scale. At 1376 pages, this book, designed by Bruce Mau, is itself certainly extra-large. S, M, L, XL is widely used for interior decorating purposes; its formidable thickness can be shown off on a shelf to good effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Analog, the Sequel: an Analysis of Current Film Archiving Practice and Hesitance to Embrace Digital Preservation by Suzanna Conrad
    ANALOG, THE SEQUEL: AN ANALYSIS OF CURRENT FILM ARCHIVING PRACTICE AND HESITANCE TO EMBRACE DIGITAL PRESERVATION BY SUZANNA CONRAD ABSTRACT: Film archives preserve materials of significant cultural heritage. While current practice helps ensure 35mm film will last for at least one hundred years, digi- tal technology is creating new challenges for the traditional means of preservation. Digitally produced films can be preserved via film stock; however, digital ancillary materials and assets in many cases cannot be preserved using traditional analog means. Strategy and action for preserving this content needs to be addressed before further content is lost. To understand the current perspective of the film archives, especially in regards to the film industry’s marked hesitation to embrace digital preservation, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences’ paper “The Digital Dilemma: Strategic Issues in Archiving and Accessing Digital Motion Picture Materials” was closely evaluated. To supplement this analysis, an interview was conducted with the collections curator at the Academy Film Archive, who explained the archives’ current approach to curation and its hesitation to move to digital technologies for preservation. Introduction Moving images are a vital part of our cultural heritage. The music, film, and broadcasting industries, as well as academic and cultural institutions, have amassed a “legacy of primary source materials” of immense value. These sources make the last one hundred years understandable as an era of the “media of the modernity.”1 Motion pictures and films were established as vital archival records as early as the 1930s with the National Archives Act, which included motion pictures in the definition of “objects of archival interest.”2 As cultural artifacts, moving images deserve archival care and preservation.3 However, the art of preserving moving images and film can at times be daunting.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Humanities
    Miriam Posner Digital Humanities Chapter 27 DIGITAL HUMANITIES Miriam Posner Digital humanities, a relative newcomer to the media scholar’s toolkit, is notoriously difficult to define. Indeed, a visitor to www.whatisdigitalhumanities.com can read a different definition with every refresh of the page. Digital humanities’ indeterminacy is partly a function of its relative youth, partly a result of institutional turf wars, and partly a symptom of real disagreement over how a digitally adept scholar should be equipped. Most digital humanities practitioners would agree that the digital humanist works at the intersection of technology and the humanities (which is to say, the loose collection of disciplines comprising literature, art history, the study of music, media studies, languages, and philosophy). But the exact nature of that work changes depending on whom one asks. This puts the commentator in the uncomfortable position of positing a definition that is also an argument. For the sake of coherence, I will hew here to the definition of digital humanities that I like best, which is, simply, the use of digital tools to explore humanities questions. This definition will not be entirely uncontroversial, particularly among media scholars, who know that the borders between criticism and practice are quite porous. Most pressingly, should we classify scholarship on new media as digital humanities? New media scholarship is vitally important. But a useful classification system needs to provide meaningful distinctions among its domains, and scholarship on new media already has a perfectly good designation, namely new media studies (as outlined in Chapter 24 in this volume). So in my view, the difference between digital humanities and scholarship about digital media is praxis: the digital humanities scholar employs and thinks deeply about digital tools as part of her argument and research methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Instructions and Dehinitions: FY2014
    Instructions and Deinitions: FY2014 Table of Contents Introduction 2 Background 2 What’s New for the FY2014 Survey 2 FAQ 4 General Instructions 6 General Information 6 Section 1: Conservation Treatment 8 Section 2: Conservation Assessment, Digitization Preparation, Exhibit Preparation 9 Section 3: General Preservation Activities 10 Section 4: Reformatting and Digitization 10 Section 5: Digital Preservation and Digital Asset Management 13 Introduction Count what you do and show preservation counts! The Preservation Statistics Survey is an effort coordinated by the Preservation and Reformatting Section (PARS) of the American Library Association (ALA) and the Association of Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS). Any library or archives in the United States conducting preservation activities may complete this survey, which will be open from January 20, 2015 through February 27, 2015. The deadline has been extended to March 20, 2015. Questions focus on production-based preservation activities for /iscal year 2014, documenting your institution's conservation treatment, general preservation activities, preservation reformatting and digitization, and digital preservation and digital asset management activities. The goal of this survey is to document the state of preservation activities in this digital era via quantitative data that facilitates peer comparison and tracking changes in the preservation and conservation /ields over time. Background This survey is based on the Preservation Statistics survey program by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) from 1984 to 2008. When the ARL Preservation Statistics program was discontinued in 2008, the Preservation and Reformatting Section of ALA / ALCTS, realizing the value of sharing preservation statistics, worked towards developing an improved and sustainable preservation statistics survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Appraisal Talk in Web Archives Ed Summers
    Appraisal Talk in Web Archives ed summers ABSTRACT The Web is a vast and constantly changing information landscape that by its very nature seems to resist the idea of the archive. But for the last 20 years, archivists and technologists have worked together to build systems for doing just that. While technical infrastructures for performing web archiving have been well studied, surprisingly little is known about the interactions between archi- vists and these infrastructures. How do archivists decide what to archive from the Web? How do the tools for archiving the Web shape these decisions? This study analyzes a series of ethnographic interviews with web archivists to understand how their decisions about what to archive function as part of a community of practice. It uses critical discourse analysis to examine how the participants’ use of language enacts their appraisal decision-making processes. Findings suggest that the politics and positionality of the archive are reflected in the ways that archivists talk about their network of personal and organizational relationships. Appraisal decisions are expressive of the structural relationships of an archives as well as of the archivists’ identities, which form during mentoring relationships. Self-reflection acts as a key method for seeing the ways that interviewers and interviewees work together to construct the figured worlds of the web archive. These factors have implications for the ways archivists communicate with each other and interact with the communities that they document. The results help ground the encounter between archival practice and the architecture of the Web. Archivaria The Journal of the Association of Canadian Archivists Appraisal Talk in Web Archives 71 RÉSUMÉ Le Web est un paysage informationnel vaste et en changement constant qui, par sa nature même, semble s’opposer à l’idée de l’archive.
    [Show full text]
  • Archives First: Digital Preservation Further Investigations Into Digital
    Archives First: digital preservation Further investigations into digital preservation for local authorities Viv Cothey * 2020 * Gloucestershire County Council ii Not caring about Archives because you have nothing to archive is no different from saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you have nothing to say. Or that you don’t care about freedom of the press because you don’t like to read. (after Snowden, 2019, p 208) Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily represent those of the institutions to which the author is affiliated. iii iv Executive summary This report is about an investigation into digital preservation by (English) local authorities which was commissioned by the Archives First consortium of eleven local authority record offices or similar memory organisations (Archives). The investigation is partly funded by The National Archives. Archival institutions are uniquely able to serve the public by providing current and future generations with access to authentic unique original records. In the case of local authority Archives these records will include documents related to significant decision making processes and events that bear on individuals and their communities. Archival practice, especially relating to provenance and purposeful preservation, is instrumental in supporting continuing public trust and essential to all of us being able to hold authority to account. The report explains how Archival practice differs from library practice where provenance and purposeful preservation are absent. The current investigation follows an earlier Archives First project in 2016-2017 that investigated local authority digital preservation preparedness. The 2016-2017 investigation revealed that local authority line of business systems in respect of children services, did not support the statutory requirement to retain digital records over the long- term (at least 100 years).
    [Show full text]
  • Exploratory Programming for the Arts and Humanities
    Exploratory Programming for the Arts and Humanities Exploratory Programming for the Arts and Humanities Second Edition Nick Montfort The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England © 2021 Nick Montfort The open access edition of this work was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. This work is subject to a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-SA license. Subject to such license, all rights are reserved. This book was set in ITC Stone Serif Std and ITC Stone Sans Std by New Best-set Typesetters Ltd. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Montfort, Nick, author. Title: Exploratory programming for the arts and humanities / Nick Montfort. Description: Second edition. | Cambridge, Massachusetts : The MIT Press, [2021] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: "Exploratory Programming for the Arts and Humanities offers a course on programming without prerequisites. It covers both the essentials of computing and the main areas in which computing applies to the arts and humanities"—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2019059151 | ISBN 9780262044608 (hardcover) Subjects: LCSH: Computer programming. | Digital humanities. Classification: LCC QA76.6 .M664 2021 | DDC 005.1—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019059151 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 [Contents] [List of Figures] xv [Acknowledgments] xvii [1] Introduction 1 [1.1] 1 [1.2] Exploration versus Exploitation 4 [1.3] A Justification for Learning to Program? 6 [1.4] Creative Computing and Programming as Inquiry 7 [1.5] Programming Breakthroughs
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Approaches to Digital Humanities Projects
    CHAPTER 2 TITLE Computing and Communicating Knowledge: Collaborative Approaches to Digital Humanities Projects AUTHORS Lisa Spiro OVERVIEW Two cultural and technological transformations are influencing the move toward collaborative digital humanities scholarship: (1) the abundance of data and (2) Web 2.0, or “the participatory web.” This chapter provides compelling examples of how humanities researchers are responding to these transformations and illustrates different approaches both to collaboration and to digital humanities research. Case studies of HyperCities, the Tibetan and Himalayan Library, the Orlando Project, and The Mind Is a Metaphor are presented based on semi-structured, hour-long interviews conducted with project leaders as well as analyses of articles and Web sites associated with the projects. In the chapter’s final section, the author examines the challenges that collaborative humanities researchers face and suggests how to better support this sort of work. TAGS collaborative, community, data, digital, humanities, information, knowledge, participatory, projects, research, scholarship, web 2.0 AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES Lisa Spiro, director of the National Institute for Technology in Liberal Education Labs, works with the liberal arts community to explore emerging educational technologies and develop collaborative approaches to integrating learning, scholarship and technology. As part of her passion for tracking emerging educational technologies and analyzing their implications for research and teaching, she edits the Digital Research Tools (DiRT) wiki and authors the Digital Scholarship in the Humanities blog. Lisa’s recent publications include a report for the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) analyzing the prospects for an all-digital academic library (with Geneva Henry), another CLIR report evaluating archival management software, and an essay examining how scholars use digital archives in American literature and culture (with Jane Segal).
    [Show full text]