Abiding by this agreement is important because if large amounts of people do things in the same way, they can benefit from each other. We finish with notes on how to preserve and continue to work on the materials we produce along the way, and finally revisit that delicate issue of digital editions.Ī standard is nothing more than a detailed agreement to do something in a particular way. Then we look at how images can be incorporated into the workflow. Then we discuss how to move from simply typing text to building a critically marked-up text, and finish that section by discussing several typical use cases. We start with a general introduction to standards in the world of computers. Rather, we shall look at our digital workflow in a more general way, paying attention to the standards we ought to use and how the photos of digitized manuscripts can fit in that workflow. All too often, discussions about digital critical editing are about its end result and the thorny question whether or not we should be making a ‘digital edition.’ Since that topic is worthy of a handbook in itself, we will not go into it in great detail. In the digital age, bringing surrogates together in one digital environment is a godsend. Indeed, for most of the twentieth century, scholars already collected photographs or microfilms of their manuscript copies in order to lay them side by side and work on them without the pressure of opening hours or erratic viewing policies at libraries. When setting out to edit a text, you will invariably find that its manuscript copies are scattered over different libraries, and it is costly and impractical to visit them one after the other. ![]() Among the most attractive aspects of digitized manuscripts is their use for philological purposes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |