Dear Paolo (if I may),
Thanks for your post. I found it very intersting and helpful indeed. Could I
ask you to think about adding your sitography to the Digital Classicist
wiki? I think we would all profit from that and could perhaps
collaboratively edit and add as we discover new such resources.
Let me also respond to your comment concerning the OCP encoding scheme. I
fully share your feelings concerning the adherence to open standards - I in
fact started the wiki entry on this topic (see
http://digitalclassicist.xwiki.com/xwiki/bin/view/FAQ/standards). When I
joined the OCP as editor of the Paraleipomena Jeremiou, of which I am
planning to 'publish' the first installment towards the end of the year,
this scheme was already established. The reason for the OCP scheme may have
been of a purely pragmatic nature. The main editors needed a simple scheme
and decided to, given their specific needs, create their own. It works well
indeed. This should not be understood as a rejection of TEI. In fact, I am
editing the ParJer in TEI and then convert it to the OCP scheme. The two
schemes are relatively easy to map to each other. I will also write a XSL
script that will transform the OCP XML into TEI. The responsible editors
seem to be generally open to discuss a migration to TEI, but it is not a
priority at the moment. Perhaps I might be also able to promote the release
of the XML source, once it migrated to TEI. Such a possible migration should
be seen as the way these projects sometime organically grow.
Best wishes,
Juan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Juan Garcés
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
Kay House, 7 Arundel Street
London WC2R 3DX
T: +44 (0)20 7848 1393
F: +44 (0)20 7848 2980
-----Original Message-----
From: The Digital Classicist List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Paolo
Sent: 03 June 2006 14:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Electronic critical editions?
Il giorno gio, 04/05/2006 alle 14.01 +0200, Neven Jovanoviæ ha scritto:
> I put together a working bibliography of digital critical editions of
> Greek and Latin texts which could be useful. Remembering to check the
> "Projects" page of the Digital Classicist wiki also helped.
> The "bibliography" is at:
> http://www.ffzg.hr/klafil/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=digitalna_kriticka_izdanja
Hallo, I am Paolo Monella, a newly-PhD at the University of Palermo
(www.unipa.it/paolo.monella). This is my first post, and I apology for
its lenght. To make my post more easily readable, I cut it up into three
parts:
1. Suggestions on sites about electronic critical editing;
2. A brief comment on the sites listed by Neven Jovanoviæ in his
sitography about electronic editions of Greek and Latin texts (I'd be
glad to hear the opinion of somebody else about these subjects);
3. A lamentation on the scarcity of such projects about _classical_
Greek and Roman texts.
* 1. Suggestions *
I am currently working on a paper on the state of digital philology (in
particular scientiphic editions) on ancient Greek and Latin texts. I
found very useful Neven Jovanoviæ's sitography, that I will add to the
results I had already found.
You could find useful in your turn the commented links in Domenico
Fiormonte's site "Digital Variants" (http://www.digitalvariants.org/),
section
"E-Philology" ( http://www.digitalvariants.org/philology/philologyhome.htm
), in Italian.
I can also suggest the experiment on Julius Obsequens' De Prodigiis by
Pietro Bortoluzzi, based on (non-TEI) XML encoding of variants:
http://www.tecnoteca.it/howto/marcaturaxml/sperimentazione (in Italian).
* 2. My comments *
As far as I see, the Cambridge "Homer and the Papyri" project is a
database of (papyrological) witnesess and variants, not a real edition
of the texts. For the very text, it links to the Perseus Projects'
edition. Don't you think that such a variants database built on the
texts collections like TLG or CLCLT (and BTL) would be a wonderful
(though so hard to create!) integration? Why one hears so hardly
researchers speak about it (like L. Perilli did in his "Filologia
Computazionale", Rome 1995)?
The Online Critical Pseudepigrapha project
(http://www.uwo.ca/kings/ocp/) seems to me a perfect example of xml
variants encoding, even though the editors apparently have chosen not to
follow the TEI guidelines for textual criticism
( http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/html/TC.html ). I
understand that the TEI proposal has (as any proposal) many limits, but
I'd like to ask Juan Garces (one of the editors) the precise reasons for
this choice.
I also had a look to the electronic critical edition of Galenus'
commentary on Hippocrates' "On the articulations" in
http://pom.bbaw.de/cmg/ by the Corpus Medicorum Graecorum/Latinorum
Project (Christian Brockmann). This also looks like a perfect
realization of electronic digital edition. But I could not find out how
the text and the variants were originally encoded. In XML, too?
In my opinion _digital_ critical editions like those of Michael Hendry
( http://www.curculio.org/Claudian/cindex1.html ) not only on Propertius
and Claudian, but also on Martial IV, Juvenal and the "Sulpiciae
conquestio", as well as other similar experiments, do not do towards the
direction of a real _electronic_ edition, that is a new _way_ of
representing textual variants. They just reproduce in html, that is on
screen, the visual representation (originating in print critical
editions) of the relationship between text and critical apparatus.
* 3. Lamentation *
I'm sorry for such a long post. But my conclusions will be short.
Why there is so little work done in the field of ancient Greek and Roman
electronic critical editing? Why (with the partial exception of Homer)
there is no 'classical' Greek or Latin author? Is somebody wondering
about this issue like me?
Thanks,
Paolo Monella
|