On 8 Oct 2014, at 21:32, Amy L. Nurnberger <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> So, what (disciplinary) examples are out there of (re-engineered) archive-ready research workflows?
it’s a fair point. I wonder whether any of us can answer the comparable question of whether there
are examples of genuinely agile software development? because the techniques are the same: start from
day 1 assuming that someone else will use your data, and make it possible for them to do so. validate the
data constantly against open standards. include documentation and metadata as part of your data. constantly
show your data to others and ask for feedback.
do I know a researcher in this university who works like that? no.
in the rather specialised area of digital texts, I do know just how much time and money can be saved by following
this attitude. As part of a Mellon-funded project I am working on, my first task was to create the testing, validation
and exposure framework for the data that comes out. I feel so much better knowing that if I fall under the infamous
bus tomorrow my colleagues have a hope of recovering my work. And what’s that if not archive-ready.
--
Sebastian Rahtz
Director (Research) of Academic IT
University of Oxford IT Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
Não sou nada.
Nunca serei nada.
Não posso querer ser nada.
À parte isso, tenho em mim todos os sonhos do mundo.
|