Reflections on Working with Omeka

This is our second week working with Omeka, and so far I find it pretty user-friendly.  I have been working with Meghan on the bird data to upload pictures, common names, and scientific names of birds who are endangered, threatened, and species of concern.  EOL has been a fantastic resource.  Finding quality pictures of the birds along with their descriptions is a cinch, and the fact that all of their pictures are creative commons save the headache of scouring the Internet for something we won't get sued for using.

The actual act of adding information as "items" onto Omeka is also extremely easy.  The Dublin Core is extensive, but at least it leaves no room for questioning about what we should include for information about our source (though I expect some of this information will be left out, as the list is so darn long). After filling this information out - which is so handily listed on EOL - it is a breeze to upload a picture of the item to the site.  Hit save and voile! The item has been added and it looks like you're a pro at this digital archive stuff.

I am looking forward to exploring more with Omeka's collections and working on creating some multi-media exhibitions (i.e. images, maps, videos, text, etc.).  The site is starting to look great and I cannot wait to see how it will look when we're finished with it.  I am ready to start working with the Gay photo collection to add another dimension to the archive.

Thoughts on the Presidential Visits to Charlotte Showcase Collection (Omeka)

I spent my time on Omeka with the Presidential Visits to Charlotte Showcase Collection.  Here's the link: http://thepresidentcomestotown.omeka.net/collections . The focus of this collection is pretty self-explanatory - it looks at Presidents of the United States who, across history, have visited Charlotte, North Carolina.  It was done as a research project by a graduate assistant at the University of North Carolina in 2010. Its disclaimer is that the exhibit does not touch upon all Presidential visits to the city, but exists to highlight some important pieces of the city's history. 

The collection is broken down into four sub-collections: Presidential Visual Aids, which include photos, letters, diaries, and newspaper clippings, the President Taft Collection, the President F. D. Roosevelt Collection, and the President Eisenhower Collection.  These last three collections all contain resources which circled around their visits to the city, including program covers, welcome letters, and photographs.  All of these collections are collected by the same, one woman, and are not incredibly comprehensive.  Although they capture the excitement of the city in response to the presidential visits, I feel like there are so many materials, and annotations, that are lacking.  There are also four exhibits featured.  They seem to include the same material as the collections, but just present them in different ways.  I like this presentation better because it walks the viewer through the event, from the arrival of the President to his speech and the celebrations that entailed.

Materials on the site can be browsed by tag.  There is also a search bar which allows for an advanced search.  The collection is so focused, however, that I think it would be possible to search the entire site by viewing every page and material in under an hour.  Although it is an interesting site, I think it could be expanded upon immensely, and appeal to history, art, and literature scholars.  As of now, there is not much scholarly collaboration happening in this showcase collection.  It has potential to grow, but needs huge amounts of annotation to offer background knowledge and more materials to enable comparison and evaluation before it could be used to create a research project. 

Computing for Archaeologists - Revised

      Eiteljorg's chapter, Computing for Archaeologists, provides readers with an outline of the history of digital computing and its uses in archaeology and an overview of the tools which archaeologists use to digitize and analyze their materials.  He also indicates what the job of the archaeologist is, and then explains how digital computing allows archaeologists to succeed at this job.  Finally, Eiteljorg addresses the limitations and downfalls of humanities computing in archaeology.  This chapter gives readers a realistic look at the state of digital computing within the archaeology discipline.
   
     Eiteljorg's primary focus in this chapter lies in the job of the archaeologist and the evolution in digital computing which has taken place since the induction of computers into the scholarly realm in the 1950's until now which has revolutionized the way archaeologists do their job.  And what is that job, you ask? While there are the obvious components of what an archaeologist does - finding material remains and unearthing them so they may be analyzed and interpreted - Eiteljorg argues that the biggest responsibility of archaeologists is record-keeping (20).  Record-keeping for archaeologists occurs in two forms; they must keep records of both the artifact and of its context within the discipline (Eiteljorg 21). With the increasing use of computers from the '50's on, archaeologists discovered that they could utilize database software to record findings and process statistics.  As computers evolved to be more accessible, flexible, efficient, and store more materials, so did the records of archaeologists (Eiteljorg 21-22).

     If you take a moment peek under the surface of archaeological record-keeping, you will find many of Unsworth's scholarly primitives at work.  The first is discovery.  Before record-keeping can occur, archaeologists must actually physically discover the artifact.  After the artifact has been unearthed, archaeologists continue the action of discovery by figuring out its archaeological context.  What is important about it? What does this artifact in this place mean for such and such civilization? These are the types of questions which archaeologists could follow to make new discoveries in their field.  Record-keeping also encourages comparison.  By compiling records into a widely-accessible database, scholars suddenly are able to compare the artifacts and discoveries of different archaeologists working on projects around the world, and to possibly compare findings with their own, as well.  A third primitive which is present with record-keeping is sampling.  By being able to search a particular tag within a database of records, archaeologists are able to sample artifacts and intellectual findings by categories which pertain to their interests.  In short, record-keeping through digital computing by archaeologists is ripe with the scholarly primitives which Unsworth highlights (Unsworth 1).

     So Eiteljorg emphasizes that computers and their digital programs are used by archaeologists as a tool for record-keeping.  When assessing which of Svensson's five modes would relate most accurately to digital computing for archaeologists, then, the obvious answer is the mode of tool.  Archaeologists do not seem to use technology as the object of study itself or as a lab where technology is used to explore as they do to utilize it as an efficient tool for keeping information (Svensson 21).  Eiteljorg highlights some of the most commonly used tools among archaeologists.  These include databases, in which archaeologists' original interest  "stemmed from hope that data storehouses could be used retrieve and analyze information from related excavations, thus permitting broader syntheses" (Eiteljorg 22). Other tools include GIS (Geographic Information System), which is used for graphical mapping, and CAD (Computer-Assisted Design) software, which can be used for record-keeping drawings or reconstruction of archaeological dig sites.  While most archaeologists use CAD for record-keeping, using it for reconstruction could fall under Svensson's mode of lab, as they are using technology as a mode of exploration (Svensson 32).  Eiteljorg also briefly cites commercial software, Internet communication, coloration of photos, and 3-D modeling of artifacts as other useful tools for archaeologists (23-25).

     According to Eiteljorg, the ability to manage more data more efficiently is the most important benefit computers have brought to the discipline of archaeology (25).  Despite the incredible gains in data-keeping which technology has enabled, however, it still has its downfalls and limitations.  One issue with the increasing use of technology by archaeologists is that it can potentially remove them from actual contact with artifacts.  This puts them at risk at losing familiarity with the objects.  Use of digital computing is also limited within the discipline to the scholars' knowledge and skills with computers and an absence of formal training with the field of archaeology.  Eiteljorg adds that it is still not a universally-held responsibility among archaeologists to effectively keep records and electronic publication has still not reached the level of validity and permanence as paper-based records (28).  While this statement seems like a discrepancy from his chapter-long claim that record-keeping is the number one responsibility among archaeologists, perhaps a lack of a universal standard is the issue among these archaeologists.  Whatever the cause, Eiteljorg concludes that the transformation from print recording to digital recording is still a work in progress within archaeology (28).

Works Cited

Eiteljorg, Harrison II. "Computing for Archaeologists." A Companion to Digital Humanities. Ed. Susan     Schreibman, Ray Siemens, and John Unsworth. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 20-30. Print.

Svensson, Patrik. "The Landscape of Digital Humanities." Digital Humanities Quarterly 4:1 (2010): 1-42. Online.

Unsworth, John. "Scholarly Primitives: What Methods do Humanities Researchers Have in Common, and How Might Our Tools Reflect This?" King's College. London, England. 13 May 2000.  Symposium.

When 0100.tif went down

Well folks, 0100.tif - that insane collaboration of illegible chicken scratch confusion - has been tackled, wrestled with, and transcribed.  I cannot say that it is perfect, or that it would actually appear as anything useful when it hits a webpage, but I still did something that I never thought I would be able to do before (or let's face it, want to do).  I don't think that I will quit my second graders and enter into a full time text encoding career.  I probably won't transcribe anything, or ever want to read the Economy chapter, again.  But I can honestly say that I think there is value in all that we did.  Even in reading Walden <---- don't quote me on that! I am happy knowing that I learned something completely, entirely, wholly, and incredibly new with TEI in the last couple of weeks - for that, I am grateful.

Reflections on Text Encoding - A follow-up on former frustration

Well, as it turns out, I was correct in believing that my manuscript leaf was not from the Reading chapter of Walden.  It is from the Economy chapter.  Figuring this tiny detail out helped me move forward with my text encoding immensely in class today.  I was able to find the Economy chapter online and search words which I had found within my manuscript leaf and believed to be correct to find exactly where my text is placed in the book.  I laughed out loud at myself when I compared what I thought some of the words were to what they actually are.  There were one or two instances, however, where it was clear that Thoreau's original manuscript did not match up with the print I had found online, but which I could not completely read, either.  Perhaps this is the reason why the published text is altered somewhat - maybe nobody knew what on earth Thoreau was writing.  

Further progress came with some of the solutions to my questions during the workshop.  These included how to deal with the page numbers in the margins, what to do with brackets, boxes, and squiggles, and how to decipher where a zone begins and ends. I feel much more confident about my transcription, but I expect it to still be rife with mistakes.  It would be naive to assume that any stab at TEI could be perfect on the first try.  But I feel good knowing I can do something that I never thought I could/would ever do, and which confuses lots of people (even if I am among those poor souls).  

My feelings about TEI today remain consistent with those of last night.  It's an insta-headache. But I guess it's kinda cool. 

Reflections of Text Encoding

Is 'Holy Crap!?!?!!? WTH??!!?!' appropriate language for a blog post regarding TEI and Thoreau's ancient, extremely valuable (I guess that's relative) manuscript leaves of Walden? I don't know or care - I think it's the only language to reflect what I just experienced.

Perhaps I'm being slightly melodramatic.  I "completed" leaf 0110.tif of the Walden manuscript.  There were sections that were easier than others, and I feel as though I have a general idea of what is going on with zones, lines, etc. However, actually reading Thoreau's handwriting is an enormous challenge.  That is where my biggest struggle is.  Much of it is illegible, and I am still unable to find the spot in the book that my leaf is from, making it nearly impossible to figure out what he wrote.  I do not recognize what I have read so far as an excerpt from the Reading chapter, which admittedly makes me a little nervous.

I also have some questions to bring to the class about what to do when there are notes written in the margin, how to indicate that something is underlined, and where zones should start if a strikethrough begins in the middle of a paragraph.  These questions are noted in my work in red, along with my uncertainties about words.  Below is what I have figured out so far:

<sourceDoc>

            <surface xml:id=”s_____”  n=”_________”  ulx= “0”  uly= “0”  lrx= “2856”  lry= “3424”>

                        <graphic url= “0110.tif”/>

                        <zone ulx= “176” uly= “184”  lrx= “1952”  lry= “996”>

                                    <line>Managed not advertised?, who, </line>

Note in margin – “p.62” … what do I do?

                                    <line>Too, was asunder that the floor, </line>

                                    <line>Does _____ way under the, </line>

                                    <line>Visitor while he is admiring,</line>

                                    <line>The _____ when the ____ when the mantel,</line>

                                    <line>_____ him through into? the _____, </line>

                                    <line>_____ _____ and homer, through, </line>

                                    <line>Earth’s, foundation! ____ </line>

                        </zone>

                        <zone rendition= “strikethrough” ulx= “1960” uly= “912” lrx= “1220” lry= “1372”>

                                    <line>[Often when, </line>

                                    <line>We ____ ____ for the beautiful, </line>

                                    <line>______ cultivated out of doors, </line>

                                    <line>Where there is ‘no house – and the,</line>

                                    <line>House - ______]’. </line>

                        </zone>

                        <zone ulx= “1432” uly= “1356” lrx= “2680” lry= “2368”>

                                    <line>Before we can adorn, </line>

                                    <line>Our house with beautiful objects – the, </line>   Note in margin- p. 63

                                    <line>Walls must be straight – and our lives, </line>

                                    <line>Must be straight, our? beautiful house-, </line>

                                    <line>____ and beautiful living be laid, </line>

                                    <line>For a foundation. Now _____, </line>

                                    <line>Call tools for the beautiful _____, </line>

                                    <line>Cultivated out of doors, where there, </line>

                                    <line>Is no house, and no house _____. </line> note that text “and no house____” is underlined

                        </zone>

                        <zone rendition= “strikethrough” ulx= “304” uly= “2476” lrx= “2626” lry= “3388”>

                                    <line>Though we are walls ______-, </line>

                                    <line>-Ted ____ that we might ____ live in, </line>

<line>A cave or a wigwam <zone rendition= “strikethrough”> to-day </zone> craves?, </line>

<line>Skins to-day – it is continents?, </line>

<line>Better to accept the _______, </line>

<line>Though so dearly bought, which the, </line>

<line>Invention and industry of mankind, </line>

<line>Often.  ___   In? much a neighbor - </line>

</zone>

To put it simply, this TEI stuff is TOUGH! My brain hurts.

Paul Schacht Video Conference - Digital Thoreau

Our video conference with Paul Schacht on Monday morning about his involvement in the Digital Thoreau project and the TEI was eye-opening in that it made apparent just how large, complex, and multi-dimensional the project, and the movement, actually is.

The first item I would like to make note of from the conference is the sheer number of layers of revisions that have been produced of Thoreau's Walden.  It is hard to believe that what scholars believe to be 7 distinct drafts of Thoreau's original have evolved into appearing as over 20 different reproductions.  Of course, that's what happens when multiple people with different viewpoints and backgrounds come together to analyze and transcribe the same exact work - there are discrepancies.  It is exciting to think that we as a class are going to play a hand in this transcription and growth of the project, and our work could actually help further Digital Thoreau.  It feels like we are some sort of team of diplomatic transcribers being called in to de-fuzz the project a bit.  Of course, that is probably  tooting our horn and giving us way more credit than deserved, but knowing that our work could have an actual impact on the project inclines me to put my best effort toward it.

The second item I would like to note is the social component of the Digital Thoreau project.  It was intriguing to hear Schacht talk about the social buzz they are trying to create around Walden by digitizing it, then allowing people to comment on it (as if it was a Facebook page, minus the trash, Schacht said).  I found his answer to James' question about who would modify the comments on the page to be interesting and agreeable.  His answer was that because the project targets a much narrower audience than most social media sites, it will probably self-regulate.  Those people visiting the site and leaving comments will most likely be involved and knowledgeable about Thoreau, and will not be just any crazy person who makes obscene comments on YouTube or Twitter.  However, it's important to remember (and Schacht did note this, too), that even really smart people can be really big nitwits.  It will be compelling to see how much the social factor takes off, and if all the concerns of anti-collaborative humanists - those afraid of people with little knowledge and/or malicious intentions derailing digital projects - have been worth all that huffing and hawing.