View the H-Albion Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-Albion's December 2011 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in H-Albion's December 2011 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the H-Albion home page.
The recent article by Bethany Nowviskie, Where Credit Is Due: Preconditions for the Evaluation of Collaborative Digital Scholarship, may be of interest. It's available free from http://www.mlajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1632/prof.2011.2011.1.169 HTH John >>I have been involved in a series of relatively large scale digitisation projects over the last ten years, and I wanted to ask the advice of this list and through it the wider historical community, about how best to cite projects like The Old Bailey Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org< http://www.oldbaileyonline.org>) and London Lives (www.Londonlives.org< http://www.Londonlives.org>). Both sites currently provide detailed citation guides, and automatically generated forms of citation for each web page that satisfy the main purpose of a citation - to be able to find the material again. But it has been represented to me that this form of citation effectively hides the creative contribution of the individual members of the teams of people who created these resources. As large scale projects become more common in the humanities, and as the number of people building careers in them grows, it seemed important to interrogate how we are currently representing the contributions made by programmers, and project managers, etc.<<
|