Archive for the ‘Text Encoding Initiative (TEI)’ Category

The Music Encoding Conference 2013

Saturday, November 10th, 2012

The Music Encoding Conference 2013

22-24 May, 2013
Mainz Academy for Literature and Sciences, Mainz, Germany

Important dates:
31 December 2012: Deadline for abstract submissions
31 January 2013: Notification of acceptance/rejection of submissions
21-24 May 2013: Conference
31 July 2013: Deadline for submission of full papers for conference proceedings
December 2013: Publication of conference proceedings

From the email announcement of the conference:

You are cordially invited to participate in the Music Encoding Conference 2013 – Concepts, Methods, Editions, to be held 22-24 May, 2013, at the Mainz Academy for Literature and Sciences in Mainz, Germany.

Music encoding is now a prominent feature of various areas in musicology and music librarianship. The encoding of symbolic music data provides a foundation for a wide range of scholarship, and over the last several years, has garnered a great deal of attention in the digital humanities. This conference intends to provide an overview of the current state of data modeling, generation, and use, and aims to introduce new perspectives on topics in the fields of traditional and computational musicology, music librarianship, and scholarly editing, as well as in the broader area of digital humanities.

As the conference has a dual focus on music encoding and scholarly editing in the context of the digital humanities, the Program Committee is also happy to announce keynote lectures by Frans Wiering (Universiteit Utrecht) and Daniel Pitti (University of Virginia), both distinguished scholars in their respective fields of musicology and markup technologies in the digital humanities.

Proposals for papers, posters, panel discussions, and pre-conference workshops are encouraged. Prospective topics for submissions include:

  • theoretical and practical aspects of music, music notation models, and scholarly editing
  • rendering of symbolic music data in audio and graphical forms
  • relationships between symbolic music data, encoded text, and facsimile images
  • capture, interchange, and re-purposing of music data and metadata
  • ontologies, authority files, and linked data in music encoding
  • additional topics relevant to music encoding and music editing

I know Daniel Pitti from the TEI (Text Encoding Initiative). His presence assures me this will be a great conference for markup, modeling and music enthusiasts.

I can recognize music because it comes in those little plastic boxes. ;-) If you want to talk about the markup/encoding/mapping side, ping me.

NEH Institute Working With Text In a Digital Age

Saturday, September 1st, 2012

NEH Institute Working With Text In a Digital Age

From the webpage:

The goal of this demo/sample code is to provide a platform which institute participants can use to complete an exercise to create a miniature digital edition. We will use these editions as concrete examples for discussion of decisions and issues to consider when creating digital editions from TEI XML, annotations and other related resources.

Some specific items for consideration and discussion through this exercise :

  • Creating identifiers for your texts.
  • Establishing markup guidelines and best practices.
  • Use of inline annotations versus standoff markup.
  • Dealing with overlapping hierarchies.
  • OAC (Open Annotation Collaboration)
  • Leveraging annotation tools.
  • Applying Linked Data concepts.
  • Distribution formats: optimzing for display vs for enabling data reuse.

Excellent resource!

Offers a way to learn/test digital edition skills.

You can use it as a template to produce similar materials with texts of greater interest to you.

The act of encoding asks what subjects you are going to recognize and under what conditions? Good practice for topic map construction.

Not to mention that historical editions of a text have made similar, possibly differing decisions on the same text.

Topic maps are a natural way to present such choices on their own merits, as well as being able to compare and contrast those choices.

I first saw this at The banquet of the digital scholars.

The banquet of the digital scholars

Saturday, September 1st, 2012

The banquet of the digital scholars

The actual workshop title: Humanities Hackathon on editing Athenaeus and on the Reinvention of the Edition in a Digital Space


September 30, 2012 Registration Deadline

October 10-12, 2012
Universität Leipzig (ULEI) & Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI) Berlin

Abstract:

The University of Leipzig will host a hackathon that addresses two basic tasks. On the one hand, we will focus upon the challenges of creating a digital edition for the Greek author Athenaeus, whose work cites more than a thousand earlier sources and is one of the major sources for lost works of Greek poetry and prose. At the same time, we use the case Athenaeus to develop our understanding of to organize a truly born-digital edition, one that not only includes machine actionable citations and variant readings but also collations of multiple print editions, metrical analyses, named entity identification, linguistic features such as morphology, syntax, word sense, and co-reference analysis, and alignment between the Greek original and one or more later translations.

After some details:

Overview:
The Deipnosophists (Δειπνοσοφισταί, or “Banquet of the Sophists”) by Athenaeus of Naucratis is a 3rd century AD fictitious account of several banquet conversations on food, literature, and arts held in Rome by twenty-two learned men. This complex and fascinating work is not only an erudite and literary encyclopedia of a myriad of curiosities about classical antiquity, but also an invaluable collection of quotations and text re-uses of ancient authors, ranging from Homer to tragic and comic poets and lost historians. Since the large majority of the works cited by Athenaeus is nowadays lost, this compilation is a sort of reference tool for every scholar of Greek theater, poetry, historiography, botany, zoology, and many other topics.

Athenaeus’ work is a mine of thousands of quotations, but we still lack a comprehensive survey of its sources. The aim of this “humanities hackathon” is to provide a case study for drawing a spectrum of quoting habits of classical authors and their attitude to text reuse. Athenaeus, in fact, shapes a library of forgotten authors, which goes beyond the limits of a physical building and becomes an intellectual space of human knowledge. By doing so, he is both a witness of the Hellenistic bibliographical methods and a forerunner of the modern concept of hypertext, where sequential reading is substituted by hierarchical and logical connections among words and fragments of texts. Quantity, variety, and precision of Athenaeus’ citations make the Deipnosophists an excellent training ground for the development of a digital system of reference linking for primary sources. Athenaeus’ standard citation includes (a) the name of the author with additional information like ethnic origin and literary category, (b) the title of the work, and (c) the book number (e.g., Deipn. 2.71b). He often remembers the amount of papyrus scrolls of huge works (e.g., 6.229d-e; 6.249a), while distinguishing various editions of the same comedy (e.g., 1.29a; 4.171c; 6.247c; 7.299b; 9.367f) and different titles of the same work (e.g., 1.4e).

He also adds biographical information to identify homonymous authors and classify them according to literary genres, intellectual disciplines and schools (e.g., 1.13b; 6.234f; 9.387b). He provides chronological and historical indications to date authors (e.g., 10.453c; 13.599c), and he often copies the first lines of a work following a method that probably goes back to the Pinakes of Callimachus (e.g., 1.4e; 3.85f; 8.342d; 5.209f; 13.573f-574a).

Last but not least, the study of Athenaeus’ “citation system” is also a great methodological contribution to the domain of “fragmentary literature”, since one of the main concerns of this field is the relation between the fragment (quotation) and its context of transmission. Having this goal in mind, the textual analysis of the Deipnosophists will make possible to enumerate a series of recurring patterns, which include a wide typology of textual reproductions and linguistic features helpful to identify and classify hidden quotations of lost authors.

The 21st century has “big data” in the form of sensor streams and Twitter feeds, but “complex data” in the humanities pre-dates “big data” by a considerable margin.

If you are interested in being challenged by complexity and not simply the size of your data, take a closer look at this project.

Greek is a little late to be of interest to me but there are older texts that could benefit from a similar treatment.

BTW, while you are thinking about this project/text, consider how you would merge prior scholarship, digital and otherwise, with what originates here and what follows it in the decades to come.

TEI Boilerplate

Tuesday, April 24th, 2012

TEI Boilerplate

If you don’t know it, the TEI (Text Encoding Initiative), is one of the oldest digital humanities projects dedicated to fashioning encoding solutions for non-digital texts. The Encoding Guidelines, as they are known, were designed to capture the complexities of pre-digital texts.

If you doubt the complexities of pre-digital texts, consider the following image of a cover page from the Leningrad Codex:

Leningrad Codex Image

Or, consider this page from the Mikraot Gedolot:

Mikraot Gedolot Image

There are more complex pages, such as the mss. of Charles Peirce (Peirce Logic Notebook, Charles Sanders Peirce Papers MS Am 1632 (339). Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.):

Peirce Logic Notebook, Charles Sanders Peirce Papers MS AM 1632 (339)

And those are just a few random examples. Encoding pre-digital texts is a complex and rewarding field of study.

Not that “born digital” texts need concede anything to “pre-digital” texts. When you think about our capacity to capture versions, multiple authors, sources, interpretations of readers, discussions and the like, the wealth of material that can be associated with any one text becomes quite complex.

Consider for example the Harry Potter book series that spawned websites, discussion lists, interviews with the author, films and other resources. Not quite like the interpretative history of the Bible but enough to make an interesting problem.

Anything that can encode that range of texts is of necessity quite complex itself and therein lies the rub. You work very hard at document analysis, using or extending the TEI Guidelines to encode your text, now what?

You can:

  1. Show the XML text to family and friends. Always a big hit at parties. ;-)
  2. Use your tame XSLT wizard to create a custom conversion of the XML text so normal people will want to see and use it.
  3. Use the TEI Boilerplate project for a stock delivery of the XML text so normal people will want to see and use it. (like your encoders, funders)

From the webpage:

TEI Boilerplate is a lightweight solution for publishing styled TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) P5 content directly in modern browsers. With TEI Boilerplate, TEI XML files can be served directly to the web without server-side processing or translation to HTML. Our TEI Boilerplate Demo illustrates many TEI features rendered by TEI Boilerplate.

Browser Compatibility

TEI Boilerplate requires a robust, modern browser to do its work. It is compatible with current versions of Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Internet Explorer (IE 9). If you have problems with TEI Boilerplate with a modern browser, please let us know by filing a bug report at https://sourceforge.net/p/teiboilerplate/tickets/.

Many thanks to John Walsh, Grant Simpson, and Saeed Moaddeli, all from Indiana University for this wonderful addition to the TEI toolbox!

PS: If you have disposable funds and aren’t planning on mining asteroids, please consider donating to the TEI (Text Encoding Initiative). Even asteroid miners need to know Earth history, a history written in texts.