Carol Anderson
IS 290-2
Electronic Publishing
October 5, 1998

Suffragists Speak Project Research

I read three articles that gave me additional insight into some of the issues pertaining to publishing oral history manuscripts on the web. The following describes the topic each article addressed and the insights I gained from them.

1. "Reading, Scholarship, and Hypertext Editions", by John Lavagnino
http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/03-01/reading.html

This article describes the needs of scholars conducting research and how hypertext can improve (and worsen) current research practices. He focused on scholars doing original research on subjects in which there can be many versions of the same material. For example, there are at least 18 versions of The Rime of the Ancient Mariner available for scholars to study.

Lavagnino states that hypertext can help scholars select and compare versions, construct new and possibly more representative versions of the text, and integrate all of this study with other scholarship and criticism. At the same time, the material shouldn't be so encumbered with annotations, discussions of the various versions, etc., that the reading experience is destroyed. By reading experience, Lavagnino means that a scholar should be able to read something without being distracted. This will allow the meaning of the text to emerge.

These observations seem to parallel what is needed for the study of oral history as well. The suffragist speak material has two versions - an audio version and a written transcript - which scholars should be able to compare. Also, each suffragist has given other interviews so researchers should be able to compare statements made at different times on the same subject. In addition, scholars should be able to share their understanding of the material and their research with other scholars. At the same time, a scholar should be able to read a transcript or major portion of the transcript without major distractions.

Some conclusions for our site include: Ensuring that there is an ability to download a large piece of each transcript (or the whole transcript) so a scholar can read it in one piece. Ensuring that hyperlinks to a bibliography, pictures, sound, etc. can be turned on or off at will. Allowing scholars to talk to each other on-line - perhaps through a message board function or some other "place" that researchers can post messages, comments, conclusions, etc. Developing a searching and linking mechanism that, to the greatest extent possible, lets users navigate through material in a way that makes sense for them.

We may not be able to implement all of these things - particularly the ability for interaction between scholars - but should keep these goals in mind.

2. "An Economic Perspective on E-Publishing in Academia", by Malcolm Getz
http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/archive/getz.html

This article describes the change in the economics faced by journal publishers and libraries due to the ability to publish print material on the web. Most of this article does not directly address our project, however, because our project needs to be viable, some of the issues discussed here can inform our approach.

Journal publishers will need to find new ways of doing business in this electronic economy. One solution might be to provide a large database of related material that would be attractive to libraries because of cost savings. Publishers who do not provide an attractive database will be at a disadvantage because their material will be much less accessible. In addition, revenue may drop since libraries may be unwilling to have a separate subscription for just one journal publication.

Another solution for publishers might be differential pricing for different levels of service. A "member" subscriber may get faster updates, more complete reference material, access to archives, and other perks unavailable to a regular subscriber.

Some thoughts for our site might be to investigate:

3. "Behind the Scenes at the William Blake Archive: Collaboration Takes More than E-Mail", by Morris Eaves http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/03-02/blake.html

This article describes the issues and insights gained from developing the William Blake Archive through a collaborative process.

Some of the interesting points gained from this article are:

Keep focused on the intent of the project and keep checking-in with members to make sure everyone has the same vision. Members of the collaborative communicated primarily through e-mail in which the subtleties of meaning got lost. Over time, conflict increase because people had developed different understandings of the purpose and direction of the project. Face-to-face meetings helped to bring everyone to the same understanding of the project goals.

It is important and very valuable to have people with different skills and personalities on a project. For example, it is important to have someone who worries about the details to counteract a "visionary" who lets the details slide.

It's very hard work to do a project that is innovative in both the content and the use of technology. Good working relationships can be difficult to sustain because the content people don't understand the constraints of the technical people and vice versa. As a result, there needs to be lots of communication and compromise among the two groups of people.