See intarch-interest list archives for previous discussion
http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/intarch-interest/archive.html
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 14:56:29 -0500
From: Paul Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
Some of us still like to read paper books, and among our favorite
places to do so are the bathroom or bed, especially the latter when
we are coping with a thick, dense monograph that puts us to sleep
within the hour. When the laptop falls to the floor on falling asleep
one may wonder about the benefits of electronic publishing.
Now, getting serious, I would like to make some comments from across
the ocean. First, allow me to tell where I am coming from. At 58 I am
one of the early computer archaeologists. I started out designing
databases and scanning graphics on an Apple II+. When Internet got
going I was enthralled with E-mail. Now I use Macs, and am a quite
profficient navigator on the Web. On the Apple I wrote most of my
programs in BASIC; now I use mostly commercial programs. I am just
beginning to feel the need to learn to design for the Web, this
year's free-time project.
I have mixed feelings about electronic publication. It is definitely
needed, especially if we want to get archaeology out to the general
public. In that sense we do need to plan the publication differently
than a normal report or monograph (Dave Petts) because the general
public does not necessarily need all the detailed data that
colleagues need, such as sherd counts, rim profiles, etc. If we were
going to publish a normal, traditional report on the web, then, well,
I might agree with Denise, that one does not have to plan it
differently, but then we would be risking a great deal.
As Gerry Mos says "...but at the end of the day is not the
information public knowledge? It is part of our collective history."
No matter what kind of archaeology we are practicing, academic or
crm, as professionals we have an obligation to make our data public,
to share it with our colleagues; that is the only ethical approach.
There can be no such thing as client confidentiality in dealing with
cultural patrimony; it is not private property.
But for our data to be useful in the long run, it must have
permanence. This is the most serious problem confronting
e-publication. I am not that up-to-date on what the Archaeology Data
Service has achieved so far, but I am pretty sure they cannot have
solved our main problems yet: just as there are few machines around
that still read 5" floppies, in 10 years, at the rate technology is
changing, it will no longer be possible to read CD's or even DVD's.
To insure electronic permanence, a scheme by which electronic data is
periodically updated in libraries must not only be implemented but
become routine worldwide before we can give up hardcopy publication.
I sort of get the impression that there are colleagues out there who
are not much worried about having the raw data around to analyze in
new ways or to look at in terms of seeing whether conclusions derived
from it are really justified. Don't tell me our students no longer
consult things such as Clark (Star Carr), Kidder (Kaminaljuyu) or
Willey (Viru Valley); had it been possible to publish any of these
electronically, they would now be lost forever.
For the time being, I feel we should publish in both places. The web
allows periodic updating of site reports as work at a site
progresses, without having to wait 10 years after fieldwork to see
the results. True, fine resolution of graphics is lost, but there are
some advantages also, such as color images which are prohibitive in
paper publications. I am optimistic, As David Petts says, all these
problems will be dealt with in time, but meanwhile, let's not risk
loosing valuable data.
As far as the loss of revenue mentioned by Rob Burns, How much
revenue does an archaeologist make from field reports? In my
experience royalties and such are unheard of in our business; we
normally have to seek foundation money for publication because no
commercial editor in his right mind would even hope to come out even.
At the Anthropology Institute of the National University we have
three computer people, one of which is good at designing for the web,
but he doesn't have time; as was mentioned, between fixing printers,
viruses, and the like of fifty researchers. To use outside people we
must start thinking of including the cost in our grant applications.
The younger generation of archaeologists have grown up with computing
and the Web; for them all this should present no problems. A further
complication is that our income depends in part upon publication, and
we must convince various bureaucratic university and government
agencies that Web publication is a valid endeavor. Perhaps as Ken
Stuart suggests, a CD-ROM may help; it is something material, more so
than an http address.
With Gerry Mos, and I suspect everyone else, I look forward to see
what the UCLA template will help us out with. It certainly sounds
interesting.
Paul
--
***************************************************
* Paul Schmidt *
* Instituto de Investigaciones Antropologicas *
* Ciudad Universitaria, UNAM *
* Mexico, D.F. 04510 *
* MEXICO *
* Tels:(52) 5-622-9565 y 5-665-0161 (Universidad) *
* 5-594-3738 (casa) *
* Fax: (52) 5-665-2959 y 5-622-9651 (Universidad) *
* E-mail: [log in to unmask] *
***************************************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
