http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/
Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
- d.
http://archiv.twoday.net/ http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/ stories/5748748/ http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
It's always good to see external organisations making available to the public material that would be more accessible to intellectual circles during the pre-Internet era.
AGK
It's always good to see external organisations making available to the public material that would be more accessible to intellectual circles during the pre-Internet era.
AGK
But from what I gather so far this is more like offering a custom Google search tailored to the EHPS approved list of sites. Well, that's what you get by navigating to their search option. How can one easily "save" the search? It would be handy to have that EHPS button to try, and some way short of having it in its own tab.
Charles
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:14 PM, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/
Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
No Poetic Edda. Less stuff than Gutenberg. Lame.
--Oskar
2009/6/8 Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:14 PM, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/ Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
No Poetic Edda. Less stuff than Gutenberg. Lame.
It's a start. If it can be improved, then good!
- d.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:47 PM, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/8 Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:14 PM, David Gerarddgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/ Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
No Poetic Edda. Less stuff than Gutenberg. Lame.
It's a start. If it can be improved, then good!
I was trying to make a funny (see http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/1816257&tid=107 for reference), apparently not very successfully.
I think it looks great! It's like a directory for those obscure university sites that have insane amount of material collected, but that you never can find.
--Oskar
David Gerard wrote:
http://archiv.twoday.net/stories/5748748/
Of course, ideally Wikipedia wants secondary sources. But this will still be of great use.
It's a directory, really. I see it has British History Online, which I use constantly, and which has both primary and secondary source material. I suppose other sites there may be likewise.
Charles