 |
 |
Dear Joel, Many thanks for this call to arms! I think I agree with pretty much everything you suggest, but just for historical context I'll reply to some of your points individually: On 21 June 2012 22:01, Kalvesmaki, Joel <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Is there any reason to keep "Resources" as a main entry on the left sidebar? The > term is vague and the content of the page it points to seems to be aged, formless, > and disjointed. That's true. We originally planned to build a bibliography of Digital Classics and that wiki page represents a very early and, as you say, disjointed and out-of-date attempt at starting that. A much better way to do this would be through an online bibliography of some kind, perhaps the Zotero group that (iirc) Matteo started up a couple years ago. Should we just link directly to that? (Along with a reminder to people to contribute to it.) Otherwise I agree that this link should be removed, because what it currently points to is not much use. > Any chance we could get the statistics page to focus not on aggregate page views > but on something more useful for authors and editors, something like top pages by > week, month, and year? What about other metrics? That would let us see what's hot I don't think I'd ever looked at the stats page before! I agree that it doesn't seem much use, but customizing it would require some administrative intervention that we're not currently in a position to carry out. I'll keep it in mind for when we have more resources available though. > The Events entry links to a page off the wiki, one that cannot be edited (as far as I can > see): http://www.digitalclassicist.org/wip/index.html Any chance we could migrate this > to a Google calendar (or similar) that can be populated directly by editors? Yes. This link is to the Digital Classicist program itself, which is (a) where we keep all the London seminar timetables and downloads, and (b) will include links to the other DC seminars in Berlin, Göttingen, Leipzig, New York, Boston etc. as they become available. I think we should keep this link (although perhaps more usefully named). If someone wanted to create a Google Calendar specifically with Digital Classics events, we'd be happy to link to that as well, however. I think to make this work would require a commitment on the part of the editor(s) both to keep it active, and to encourage as many other users as possible to contribute to it. Genuine question: how much would such a calendar overlap with/differ from the Digital Humanities/Digital Libraries calendar at <https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=g2hval0pee3rmrv4f3n9hp9cok%40group.calendar.google.com>? If simply adding several DC-obsessed new editors to that calendar would do the job, I would strongly recommend doing that. (But that decision of course lies with whoever's actually going to take responsibility to do this.) > Finally, fellow editors, please populate the wiki. Numerous projects that I've seen ... >you're not an editor please sign up to become one. This wiki has great potential, but > has a long way to go. (Wouldn't it be amazing, for example, to see Babeu's fantastic > 2010 report on classical tools ["Rome wasn't digitized in a day"] fully integrated?) Amen. And while I'm here, many thanks to Joel who has made dozens of edits in the last few days. He should be an inspiration to us all! Best, Gabby -- Dr Gabriel BODARD (Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy) Centre for Computing in the Humanities King's College London 26-29 Drury Lane London WC2B 5RL Email: [log in to unmask] Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388 Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980 http://www.digitalclassicist.org/ http://www.currentepigraphy.org/