Hi, everyone.
I do have some experience with TEI markup (but don't know anything about
the MW extension).
TEI is an XML dialect. As such, there are general XML tools useful for
editing it, and one of the favorite tools among TEI practitioners is the
(proprietary and commercial) Oxygen XML Editor[0], which has significant
customized support for TEI, but is a desktop application and is not
collaborative.
Lars asked a good question, in that the goals of those scholars are rather
different from ours: TEI practitioners are general in the business of
creating critical editions[1] and multitexts[2]. They use TEI to denote
textual details such as emendations, corrections, crossed-out words,
divergences between different textual "witnesses", scribal notes, sometimes
even a change of ink or scribal hand; see for example [3]. They spend
years and six/seven-figure sums creating things like [2] or [4] the
unfortunately-firewalled-but-huge[5].
Whereas the TEI folks are generally:
a. academics and paid professionals
b. well-funded
c. radically detail-oriented
d. working until it is done/perfect
e. focused on depth of critical edition over quantity of works produced
(dozens of man-years per critical edition)
We Wikisourcerors and gonzo librarians[7] are generally:
a. volunteers
b. not funded. (though we do have access to grants if we need them)
c. fairly detail-oriented
d. release/publish early and often; fix things as we go; tolerate errors
and trusting an asymptotic improvement curve.
e. focused on quantity of works made accessible. (dozens/hundreds of
_hours_ per work)
This, to me, suggests that there should be a reasonable limit to how far we
go out of our way to support the TEI community on the Mediawiki platform.
While a powerful collaborative Mediawiki-powered TEI editor would be neat,
I don't think it's the Wikimedia movement that should be the main force
driving (and funding) its development.
Hope this helps,
Asaf
[0]
http://www.oxygenxml.com/
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism
[2]
http://www.homermultitext.org/
[3] e.g.
http://www.janeausten.ac.uk/manuscripts/blpers/23.html
[4]
http://dare.uni-koeln.de/ [6]
[5]
https://faustedition.uni-wuerzburg.de/dev/project/about [6]
[6] disclosure: I have collaborated and am friends with some of the
engineers working on these two projects.
[7] To those who may not know, Lars runs Project Runeberg; I run Project
Ben-Yehuda. Both are free volunteer-run digital libraries of public domain
texts.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Thomas Tanon <thomaspt(a)hotmail.fr> wrote:
It’s possible to create a new content type called
something like ‘TEI’
that would replace wikitext with its own renderer. This capacity have been
added in MediaWiki for Wikidata development. In order to make it used by
the ProofreadPage extension it’s possible but not completely easy.
The pointed extension only adds some TEI tags to Wikitext markup and, so,
isn’t an solution for this problem. Implement a full solution is a big task
but not really difficult if we have a good TEI -> HTML renderer. It can be
done, I think, in one or two months of work.
Thomas
Le 21 nov. 2013 à 17:18, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com> a écrit :
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Lars Aronsson <lars(a)aronsson.se> wrote:
On 11/21/2013 03:55 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote:
I stumbled across this extension because today my
collegues came to me
asking about the Proofread extension and TEI.
the have a very common problem: they need a collaborative TEI editor for
transcribing a scanned manuscript.
This is something we know, as many GLAMs and professors have the same
issue;
and this is something that wikisource did not know how to handle.
Why are your colleagues doing TEI markup?
What is the output? How is it used? What is
it that TEI markup gives them, that the current
Wikisource process (scanning + proofreading
+ wiki markup + transclusion) doesn't give them?
My collegues (from the University of Bologna digital library)
are working for a
Digital Humanities project.
In the DH field (Asaf, you can weight in here :-)
you often need to mark up some correction, notes, sequence of corrections,
mispellings, differences between manuscripts and printed works, etc.
We can't get that level of "granularity", on Wikisource (or, we could, via
templates).
The TEI is a standard de fact markup language for these kind of
philological issues.
My idea (from my limited understanding) is that if we develop a good
MediaWiki extension for this, many researchers will then use MediaWiki +
proofredExtesnsion + TEI extension
as a collaborative TEI editor. Then they can visualize these data as they
want, as in these projects:
http://www.janeausten.ac.uk/index.html
http://entretenida.outofthewings.org/index.html
http://vangoghletters.org/vg/letters/let002/letter.html
Some of them, I hope could actually use Wikisource, if we alreqady had all
the software needed.
Aubrey
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Project Runeberg - free Nordic literature -
http://runeberg.org/
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
--
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org