Hugendubel.info - Die B2B Online-Buchhandlung 

Merkliste
Die Merkliste ist leer.
Bitte warten - die Druckansicht der Seite wird vorbereitet.
Der Druckdialog öffnet sich, sobald die Seite vollständig geladen wurde.
Sollte die Druckvorschau unvollständig sein, bitte schliessen und "Erneut drucken" wählen.

Digitale Edition in Österreich. Digital Scholarly Edition in Austria.

E-BookEPUB0 - No protectionE-Book
248 Seiten
Mehrsprachig
Books on Demanderschienen am26.04.20231. Auflage
Between 2016 and 2020 the federally funded project "KONDE - Kompetenznetzwerk Digitale Edition" created a network of collaboration between Austrian institutions and researchers working on digital scholarly editions. With the present volume the editors provide a space where researchers and editors from Austrian institutions could theorize on their work and present their editing projects. The collection creates a snapshot of the interests and main research areas regarding digital scholarly editing in Austria at the time of the project.mehr
Verfügbare Formate
BuchGebunden
EUR39,00
E-BookEPUB0 - No protectionE-Book
EUR9,99

Produkt

KlappentextBetween 2016 and 2020 the federally funded project "KONDE - Kompetenznetzwerk Digitale Edition" created a network of collaboration between Austrian institutions and researchers working on digital scholarly editions. With the present volume the editors provide a space where researchers and editors from Austrian institutions could theorize on their work and present their editing projects. The collection creates a snapshot of the interests and main research areas regarding digital scholarly editing in Austria at the time of the project.
Details
Weitere ISBN/GTIN9783757898038
ProduktartE-Book
EinbandartE-Book
FormatEPUB
Format Hinweis0 - No protection
Erscheinungsjahr2023
Erscheinungsdatum26.04.2023
Auflage1. Auflage
ReiheSchriften des Instituts für Dokumentologie und Editorik
Reihen-Nr.16
Seiten248 Seiten
SpracheMehrsprachig
Artikel-Nr.11590025
Rubriken
Genre9200

Inhalt/Kritik

Leseprobe

Where are the Tools? The Landscape of
Semi-Automated Text Edition

Tara L. Andrews

Abstract


The aim of this article is to answer the question: given that there have been so many tools and methods developed to help prepare scholarly critical editions of texts, why do so many scholars have trouble knowing where to start? The article walks the reader through the typical process of creating an edition, mentioning along the way a variety of tools that have been developed or used in the Austrian landscape in particular, and aims thereby to illustrate many of the considerations that the scholar setting out on an edition project must account for.


Zusammenfassung


Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, eine Antwort auf die Frage anzubieten: Wenn so viele Werkzeuge und Methoden entwickelt worden sind, um kritische Editionen von Texten vorzubereiten, warum finden es dann so viele WissenschafterInnen schwierig zu wissen, wo sie anfangen sollen? Der Artikel führt den Leser durch den typischen Prozess der Erstellung einer Edition, erwähnt dabei eine Vielzahl von Werkzeugen, die insbesondere in der österreichischen Landschaft entwickelt wurden oder verwendet werden, und versucht damit viele der Überlegungen sichtbar zu machen, die zu Beginn eines Editionsprojekts berücksichtigt werden müssen.


As more or less any professor, teaching fellow, or research assistant in the field of Digital Humanities can attest, there is a great deal of interest from scholars in the literary and historical fields about digital editions of texts and how they might be feasibly done. Yet many of these scholars have little idea where to start or what tools exist that are relevant for the particular work they wish to do, despite the fact that textual criticism has been on an increasingly digital trajectory since well before the availability of the World Wide Web. After so many years of development of the digital edition, this seems like a rather odd state of affairs-there are, after all, a plethora of tools available for use (Klug, Galka and Steiner 2021; see also the discussion of several of these tools and methods in Vogeler 2019). Why, then, can it be so difficult to advise scholars about a way forward?

The purpose of this article is to walk the reader through the process of creating a digital edition, from initial transcription to publication and including various methods of source analysis. Along the way we will cover a range of tools that have emerged, especially in Austria, to assist with the creation of digital editions. We must, however, stress the following. Although many textual scholars hope for a single full-featured software package designed to take their editions all the way from conception to publication without the need either to learn their way around computer programming or to hire someone who does, this hope is sadly misplaced. There are almost as many possible forms of digital edition as there are texts tobe edited. Every editor will have a different set of priorities for her edition, not to mention a text (or a corpus) that differs from other texts in ways that are perhaps small, but certainly crucial, for the purpose of preparing that edition. While the argument has been made elsewhere that there can be no monolithic general-purpose tool (van Zundert and Boot 2011), we hope with this walk-through of digital editing processes to illuminate why this is the case.

Given the high degree of specialization that any edition project must reach, a scholar who wishes to produce a digital edition should expect to exercise a significant amount of control over the process. As such, the scholar will need to know the principles, and the limitations, of the data modelling system that is used to render texts into the digital medium, and will need to understand how and where the choices made for her particular project might differ from the assumptions built into the tools that are available for analysis and publication of the result. In many cases, in fact, different tools take a different set of assumptions as their starting point, and so the editor will eventually need to understand the data models and their associated technologies well enough to assess how-or indeed whether-these differences can be bridged. We contend here that, in order to create a digital edition on time and within budget, a scholar cannot hope to rely entirely on IT experts hired for the purpose. She will need to gain enough knowledge, not only about how text encoding is done, but also about what is done with the result of that encoding and the parameters of the technologies that are used to do it, tobe able to make informed decisions.
1 From scholarly work to digital model

Texts can be published into the digital medium by a variety of means. The basic requirement for any online publication is that it must be expressed as one or more documents rendered in HTML-the standard format for web documents-and hosted on a server connected to the Internet, under a publicly reachable URL. In order for this publication tobe a critical edition, it is only necessary that those documents, in one way or another, contain a faithful representation of the critical text and any apparatuses or other commentary that the editor felt necessary to include.

There are many possible pathways to this end state. For example, it is easy to envision the preparation of the edition in a word processor, where the document is then saved into HTML format and given to a hosting provider. That would result in an online publication that may be digital enough for many purposes, but could not be considered a digital edition in the sense proposed by Sahle (2016).

A middle ground between the print and the digital can be found with software such as the Classical Text Editor (CTE), developed at the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW) by Stefan Hagel (1997-). This is a package intended specifically for the creation of critical editions from multiple witness copies. Its user interface is intended to hew as closely as possible to the familiar interface of a word processor, while extending the functionality to provide for the things that an editor will need, such as the definition of sigla to correspond to witnesses, the possibility to record variant readings to the edited text based on those witnesses, the possibility to add other sorts of scholarly apparatus according to the conventions of classical philology.

Although the primary output of CTE is a print-ready document suitable for submission to a book publisher, it also offers the option of export to a TEI-XML format, which could then be transformed to HTML and published online (see below). This feature, added by CTE s author in the hope of encouraging the proliferation of companion digital publications by CTE users alongside the more usual print publications, has not had widespread use (Hagel 2007, 78). The author attributes this to a lack of institutional interest in digital publications; while this may still have been true in 2007, it is much less true today, and yet those who call themselves digital philologists still do not usually recommend CTE as a means to produce a digital edition. The reasons for this, we would argue, go deeper than institutional interest.

One of the major design decisions of CTE is to allow the scholar to create a text edition that conforms to her exacting scholarly specifications, but without troubling her with any sort of surfacing tags or other sorts of code [which] can be detrimental to the ability of the editor to remain devoted to scholarly questions (Hagel 2007, 79). While this is an admirable goal, it may actually be part of the problem. CTE encourages the scholar to concentrate primarily on how the edition will look once it is printed. Although the software has a reasonably complex conceptual model, the scholar not inclined to study this model or to familiarise herself with the advanced features of CTE will quickly find that she can produce an edition that looks right on the page even when the model is violated internally.

For example, CTE provides a mechanism for recording additions, omissions, and transpositions, and for specifying the abbreviations that should appear in the apparatus criticus when one of these situations arises. The user can, on the other hand, achieve the same outward effect simply by inputting these abbreviations as though the abbreviation was itself the text of a variant. The distinction is invisible in the resulting print proof, but in the companion XML output, incorrect use of the data model will instantly undermine any automated attempts to parse the document for the edition text and the variant witness texts. Several potential inconsistencies of this type were encountered in the attempt to write a parser for CTE s flavour of TEI-XML, for use with the Stemmaweb service (Andrews n.d.).

It is thus clear that, if a user of CTE wishes to produce a useful digital output alongside the print output of an edition, she must take care to understand not only the scholarly features of CTE, but also the data model that underlies what is displayed on the screen. She will soon find that there is a set of technical assumptions embedded in the software about how to represent the data that has been entered by the scholar, and more assumptions about how to translate the text from the CTE model into the TEI double-endpoint-attachment means of encoding variant text. She will then need to draw upon her understanding of the data model as it was expressed in the TEI output, in order to use...
mehr

Autor