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