Submitted the hard copy of the critique, links and bibliography tonight. Now for the blog post. Hope it is all in order and I have not made some glaring errors. Here goes:
Nines (Networked Infrastructure for
Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship) is an online historical resource for
scholars of the 19th century. [1] Its co-organisation 18th
Connect provides 18th century literary and historical sources. [2] Both sites are funded by the Mellon Foundation; are
maintained by Virgina University and have a shared index of resources. [3]
Nines accumulates
data from other major online resources, and a subscription is required to
access this. The focal points on its homepage are the Search Box, Featured
Object, Browse Recent Tags and Recent News. There are links for information
about the site and Peer Review; but these are not immediately obvious to
the user. [4] This information would be better situated on
the homepage along with the existing links to federated websites. The other
homepage links could be listed on one side as they utilize a lot of space.
Metadata is
needed for peer reviews which includes information about the author, title,
date and source.[5] RDF (Resource Description Framework)
is an XML (Extensible Markup Language) metadata model used in relation
to this.[6] My 9s is another link on this page
which allows scholars to tag items and share research online. [7] This creates an individual
workspace enabling more searches. Nines is aimed at specialist scholars rather
than other users who would need some awareness of nineteenth century topics.
Methodologies
include two software collating tools: Collex and Juxta. Collex assembles
exhibitory items. It controls Nines and provides interface design. [8] It allows researchers to collate and tag
digital texts or images; facilitates browser compatibility and enables sharing
of information. This includes primary and secondary sources. Juxta has
various formats that analyse texts for scholars.[9] It consists of complex features and
visualisations: histograms of results; a heat-map of text-variations and
allocation of scripts to digital images. The newer Juxta versions support XML import
files and provide default XML templates for tags. Juxta received a Google
Digital Humanities Award: Nines intends to use this to develop Juxta further by
linking it to Google Books.[10]
18thConnect
has developed a crowd-sourcing tool called Typewright which permits
researchers to modify texts using OCR (Optical Character Recognition)
software. [11]
This site acknowledges that these texts are sometimes of inferior quality. 18thConnect
employs the same tools as Nines, but use their own distinctive style. The Nines
site suggests that the extensive range of online tools could overwhelm
scholars; and therefore proposes to update the ‘recommended tools’ section.
To
summarise, the overall visual design on Nines has good accessibility to data
via links to a wealth of primary sources: prints, letters and diaries.
Secondary sources are provided by post-graduate students and other scholars. Software
tools are part of the methodology that is relevant to these sources. However,
most of the information about Nines software is obtained from links on the 18th
Connect site because the Nines’ links are not consistent. The majority of
embedded links in the 18th Connect text are not obvious unless a
mouse is hovered over them. On both sites this could be improved by more drop
box facilities, a brighter font colour and more underlining. There is extensive
technical jargon which involves considerable research. The homepage could have
more clarity by providing a summary of Nines’ facilities. General information
about artefacts and museum collections could be made available to users other
than scholars.
Word count
(excluding footnotes): 543 words
[1]
http://www.nines.org/ accessed 25.02.2012
[2]
http://www.18thconnect.org/about/ accessed 26.02.2012
[4]
http://www.nines.org/about/peer-review/ accessed 25.02.2012
[5]
http://www.nines.org/about/scholarship/peer-review/ accessed 25.02.2012
[6]
http://www.nines.org/about/scholarship/submissions/ accessed 26.02.2012
[7]
http://www.nines.org/my9s accessed 02.03.2012
[8]
http://www.nines.org/about/software/ accessed 02.03.2012
[9]
http://www.juxtasoftware.org/ accessed 02.03.2012
[10]
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/our-commitment-to-digital-humanities.html accessed 03.03.2012
[11]
http://www.18thconnect.org/typewright/documents accessed 03.03.2012
Bibliography
http://www.nines.org/ accessed
25.02.2012
http://www.18thconnect.org/about/ accessed
26.02.2012
http://www.nines.org/about/peer-review/ accessed
25.02.2012
http://www.nines.org/about/scholarship/peer-review/ accessed
25.02.2012
http://www.nines.org/about/scholarship/submissions/ accessed
26.02.2012
http://www.nines.org/my9s accessed
02.03.2012
http://www.nines.org/about/software/ accessed
02.03.2012
http://www.juxtasoftware.org/ accessed
02.03.2012
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/our-commitment-to-digital-humanities.html accessed
03.03.2012
http://www.18thconnect.org/typewright/documents
accessed 03.03.2012
This sounds really good! Very interesting and technical :D I'm also very glad that you have excluded footnotes. In other essays I normally include footnotes but If i was to do that with this critique then I would be very much over the word limit!
ReplyDelete