I would like to talk about Islandora!!
As someone who works in the intersection of history of the book and history of science, I’ve been interested in the technology that has enabled the transmission of knowledge produced (we can think of volvelles, flapbooks and other cut-out books) and pre-computer multimedia formats that one see even in early modern books (dialectic marginalia, 2-D folds and cut-outs, and manicules) and how that is translated into a computerized setting (surprisingly, except for narratives turned into a game, is still limited).
Of course, many of the tools appropriated in digital humanities for knowledge transmission and research work has already been practiced for decades by the people in the sciences (doctype formatting via Latex and Postscript for instance) who create modules and programs to expedite the work they need to perform, we see a growing number of tools to help non-scientists visualize the sort of data they work with. I am interested in questions that go beyond TEI, XSLT and all publishing tags and mark-ups, but how do we engage with the tools we have decided to work with more critically, and thereby, create critical tools that help us reflexively negotiate the work we do. Should all of those engaging with computer-based humanities be required to learn to write codes at least sufficiently to buid their own modules when required?
On a different scale, how do we deal with the many issues relating to bibliography in the humanities for material that do not subscribe to more formal document types (a memo, a handwritten note or even chat discussion). How do we deal with the history of the book in connecting its past with its present condition. What makes the book intrinsic to the humanities (I do not just mean just in literary or historical fields, but yet, especially in these fields) in a way that is different in the social and natural sciences? How does DH contribute to rethinking the meaning and purpose of the book?
I would be interested in chatting about how feedback (& feed-forward) loops that cross back and forth between digital and analog practices change (or not) the way we think about how network technology influences teaching, culture, and social interaction at the level of the individual. I’ve thought about this in the past as a conversation that puts Hayles’s concept of Intermediation side-by-side with Galloway’s readings of the fundamental differences between protocological and bureaucratic behavior patterns. The results of these ponderings have helped me rethink how individuals steeped in network culture frame themselves as possessive (hence, proprietary) individuals. I’m curious to hear how folks who have spent time thinking about and working in DH might frame this kind of interplay on a more-or-less atomistic level.
I’d like some brainstorming for a newby beginning to work in the field of DH… and (like GhostProf) applying for funding. I’m worried that I don’t know (yet) what I don’t know (yet?!). But I’d also like to explore setting up a community of DH-ers who work on long nineteenth-century projects (for advice, support and encouragement…and help).
I’m new to DH approaches, but would really like a session that deals with funding issues — how to get it, where it comes from, how to make sure your project is maintained when done, etc.
I’m interested in hearing a bit about GIS and what people are doing with it.
I’m interested in talking about a couple things involving the sustainability of DH tools and promoting user-centered development of DH tools.
My questions about these issues come from the project I’m currently conducting that is a type of user assessment of MONK (monk.library.illinois.edu). MONK is a web-based text-mining tool that originated as a DH research project (monkproject.org) and is now a research resource hosted by the University of Illinois Library. In this study, I ask: How are humanities scholars learning about and using MONK in their research? How can this tool be revised and improved to fit the broadest range of research needs for humanities scholars? What can and should be done to sustain this tool, and who should be involved?
These questions have also been asked this past week at DHSI, especially at the grad colloquium: student scholars have presented these amazing tools and resources they’ve built, but many of the projects have an uncertain future for their sustained support and longevity. So I think a great discussion could revolve around these questions, and I hope enough other people are interested in this topic to join me in a session!