Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

Group 4 Agents and issues

Data visualizers

  • Interested in quantity
  • More data the better
  • Metadata about conditions under which data was produced (they could clean up but want to know how transparency
  • Ultimately their project is different–their projects will have life of their own
  • The output might stand on its own, how could it connect back?  Publicity yet, but other links back might be logistically hard.  Potential for fresh view on source; might inspire or inform revisiting the data.  
  • Prompt new visitors

Web developers

  • Infrastructure is core interest; probably less interested in content
  • If built on open source tools, then that culture (sharing and improving code)
  • Cater for communities, but challenge of sustainability
  • Bridging the gap between experts and community/users
  • Bridging the gap between experts and web developers  (communication issues between developers and digital humanists needs to be smooth); DH community needs to frame needs clearly

 

Expert in semantic technologies

  • Data quality and transparency issues are important; might have stricter view of wanting to start with cleaner data
  • Output might require compliance with Semantic web (or RDF?)

Dialect speakers

  • Experts in their own (almost like there is a hierarchy)
  • Fostering community
  • Starting from a specific identity
  • Might require more tailored tool  (handle different scripts? Older spellings)

 

Digital natives, millennials

  • Different expectations about usability
  • Might be more selective choosing content/project that is meaningful
  • Different user patterns
  • Potentially different user patterns
  • (Audience has different needs)

 

Small archives

  • Benefit streamlined technological infrastructure  (perhaps “off-the-shelf”)
  • Need clearly stated best practices
  • Visibility
  • Staff time is very, very limited (maybe not as much opportunity for dialog with volunteers)

Whole community

  • Opportunities for team building (or acknowledging/
  • Rewards/status levels
  • Feature accomplishments of individuals to whole community
  • Need to respect boundaries of volunteers (find out if they are comfortable being in spotlight)

OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
nheywood (June 29, 2017). Group 4 Agents and issues. Participatory Engagement in Digital Humanities. Retrieved April 26, 2025 from https://doi.org/10.58079/sscw


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.