(sorry, was meant to go directly to Gabriel, please disregard)
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:16:09PM +0000, Nick White wrote:
> Dear Gabriel,
>
> Find attached an abstract for the seminar series. I'm the IT
> research consultant for Barbara Graziosi's Living Poets project, by
> the way, working with Peter Heslin.
>
> Hope it sounds interesting to you.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nick White
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 06:26:03PM +0000, Gabriel Bodard wrote:
> > The Digital Classicist London seminar series, which provides a forum
> > for research into the ancient world that employs digital research
> > methods, invites submissions for Summer 2013.
> >
> > We warmly welcome contributions from students as well as established
> > researchers and practitioners. Themes could include digital text,
> > semantics and linguistics, imaging and visualization, linked data,
> > open access, geographic analysis, information science and serious
> > gaming, although this list is by no means exhaustive. While we
> > welcome high-quality application papers discussing individual
> > projects and their immediate context, the series also hopes to
> > accommodate broader theoretical consideration of the use of digital
> > technology in ancient studies. Presentations should have an academic
> > research agenda relevant both to classicists, ancient historians or
> > archaeologists, and to information specialists or digital humanists.
> >
> > The seminars will run on Friday afternoons at 16:30, from June to
> > early August in the Institute of Classical Studies, Senate House,
> > London. There is a budget to assist with travel to London (usually
> > from within the UK, but please enquire if you’re coming from further
> > afield).
> >
> > To submit a paper for consideration for the Digital Classicist
> > London Seminars, please email an abstract of 300-500 words to
> > [log in to unmask], by midnight UTC on March 22nd, 2013.
> >
> > More information will be found at
> > http://www.digitalclassicist.org/wip/wip2013.html
> >
> > --
> > Dr Gabriel BODARD
> > Researcher in Digital Epigraphy
> >
> > Digital Humanities
> > King's College London
> > 26-29 Drury Lane
> > London WC2B 5RL
> >
> > T: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
> > E: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
> > http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
> # Coding Uncertainty
>
> Digital technologies tend to assume an epistemology of certainty, quite inappropriate to the uncertain, interpretive acts of our discipline. But there is no reason for things to be so. Technologies exist that allow for different, competing assertions, which can be drawn together from diverse sources.
>
> Imagine a database containing a corpus of texts, that also encodes which texts influenced which other texts. This is a particularly clear example of an encoding which will be contested and will change over time; it is interpretive. For that matter, the way of displaying the information is itself interpretive; it will inevitably obscure some things and reveal others.
>
> Uses of digital technology at present tend to obscure these facts, disregarding the methodologies we had previously been so careful to observe.
>
> RDF could provide a good solution to these issues. Its use so far has largely been in a normative context, but it fits our needs quite well, for several reasons:
>
> It is decentralised, both at the interface and encoding level. Interfaces to the data can be created by anybody. Additions and modifications can easily be made and published by anybody, and incorporated (or not) by any interface to the data. This is simple, thanks to RDF's reliance on URIs.
>
> It is extensible, thanks to the idea of multiple "vocabularies" that is core to RDF. This enables different framings of ideas, whether in attempts to express ideas more clearly, or to add new ideas to an existing encoding.
>
> At present there are no interfaces to create and interpret RDF that are designed with such a focus. This paper will explore options for user interfaces which enable easy and natural uses of RDF in this way, encouraging the creation of a diversity of encodings of views of the data.
|