Hi Gabby, Juan, and everyone:
I'm more than happy to publish, mirror, or simply link to any sort of
best practices guides digitalclassicists produce, if that would be
helpful. If they emerge via a wiki you've implemented it may be best
to keep them in that sort of environment. We tried to publish a
variety of such guides in the early years of the Stoa but I was never
happy with how quickly they became static objects. (In fact some
could perhaps be moved over to DC and revived.) We've always used
development machines (with multiple accounts) plus a production server
(inaccessible as we could get it) for good reason, but that made it
all the more cumbersome for authors of such guides to add to and
modify their guides with a minimum of fuss. So the wiki really seems
better as a venue for guides that need to grow. Q: how does a wiki
product relate to a versioning system? Worth checking particular
instances of docs in somewhere? I'm ignorant there.
Juan asked in a follow-up to Gabby's message about redundancy in
communications, esp. if multiple authors could log on to the blog I've
got going at the Stoa and post there. Sure! Actually that was the
original idea and at least four people already do have such accounts,
but they just don't use them. Maybe it takes a certain kind of
self-exposing personality to want to blog, I don't know ;-) But if
you guys like blogging at the digitalclassicist blog you've got set up
I can understand that too. The only thing is that if we get together
at one place and generate more frequent posts, we probably draw more
visitors, loom larger. My own blogging focus seems to be almost
entirely on the shift to OA models of publication and IP, since I
survey the scene and see so many (to my mind) unfortunate and
ill-conceived moves being made all the time, notably by the old-line
professional organizations. But other people care about other things
and will blog their own interests. Two blogs or one?
Also on the topic of communication there's the question of listserves.
Over the years I've started ones for discussion of classics cocoon
development, unicode, markup, and probably some others. Those seem to
me to continue serving a purpose, if sporadically, as a way to put
people in touch with others more experienced at particular tasks. We
need to advertise their availability.
I've gone on too long so I'll stop but let me just say how exciting it
is to see the circle getting bigger this way. Congratulations on
getting the DC idea going. I want to help however you think best.
Whatever resources in terms of servers or backup or software
implementations you want to make use of at the Stoa -- by all means
let's put all this fancy stuff to use and do some good work!
Ross
On 7/4/05, Gabriel BODARD <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think one of the most important things to resolve at this early stage is the
> relationship of Digitalclassicist with other sites and projects that have a
> closely related purpose, the most important of which is probably the Stoa
> consortium.
>
> Clearly we should work closely together, and indeed cannot help but do so.
> Perhaps we might also formalise the relationship in some way. (With a Stoa
> affiliation logo somewhere on the site?) We have suggested that final or stable
> versions of guides to good practice that come out of the wiki could be
> published on the Stoa website. Does this sound reasonable to you, Ross? In what
> other ways might we cement the ties between the two projects,
>
> All best,
> --
> =======================================
> Gabriel BODARD
> Inscriptions of Aphrodisias
> Centre for Computing in the Humanities
> King's College London
> Kay House
> 7, Arundel Street
> London WC2R 3DX
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: +44 (0)20 78 48 13 88
> Fax: +44 (0)20 78 48 29 80
> =======================================
>
>
>
|