Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (9)
Similar to Reorienting XML/TEI in composition
Similar to Reorienting XML/TEI in composition (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Reorienting XML/TEI in composition
- 1. (Re)orienting XML/TEI in Composition Kevin G. Smith @keving_smit h Northeastern University
- 3. [A]s our tools for manipulating digital models improve, the model stops marking loss and takes on a clearer role as a strategic representation, one which deliberately omits and exaggerates and distorts the scale so that we can work with the parts that matter to us. - Julia Flanders, “The Productive Unease of 21st- century Digital Scholarship”
- 4. CC: łukasz łuszczek (Flickr) critical making
- 5. critical making in the classroom CC: łukasz łuszczek (Flickr) As my students build—both collaboratively and creatively—they are also reshaping, and that very reshaping is an interpretative process. It is not writing, or at least not only writing. And it is certainly not only thinking. - Mark Sample, “Building and Sharing”
- 6. project motivations Critical making Teacher research CC: Quinn Dombrowski Flickr: quinn.anya
- 7. http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/examples-seg.html Element: “seg” Attribute: “type” Attribute value: “stutter”
- 10. Assignment Requirements Custom Schema Writing Program B C GD E F XML documents Markup top-down, schema-driven
- 12. Analysis Schema Design Schema Markup B C GD E F XML documents Bottom-up, data-driven Assignment
- 16. Custom CSS
- 18. Contact Twitter: @keving_smith Email: kgsmith2@gmail.com Web: kevingeraldsmith.com Works CitedConatser, Trey. “Changing Medium, Transforming Composition.” Journal of Digital Humanities. 2.2 (2013): n. pag. Web. 15 July 2015. Flanders, Julia. “The Productive Unease of 21st-Century Digital Scholarship.” 3.3 (2009): n. pag. Digital Humanities Quarterly. Web. 20 July 2015. Manovich, Lev. “What Is Visualization?” paj:The Journal of the Initiative for Digital Humanities, Media, and Culture 2.1 (2010): n. pag. Web. 18 July 2015. Nowviskie, Bethany. “Neatline & Visualization as Interpretation.” Web blog post. Bethany Nowviskie. 2 Nov. 2014. Web. 18 July 2015. Piez, Wendell. “Beyond the ‘Descriptive vs. Procedural’ Distinction.” Markup Lang. 3.2 (2001): 141–172. ACM Digital Library. Web. 18 July 2015. Ramsay, Stephen. “On Building.” Web blog post. Stephen Ramsay. 11 Jan. 2011. Web. 18 Jan. 2015. Sample, Mark. “Building and Sharing (When You’re Supposed to Be Teaching).” Journal of Digital Humanities. N.p., 9 Mar. 2012. Web. 18 July 2015. ---. “What’s Wrong With Writing Essays.” Gold, Matthew K. ed. Debates in the Digital Humanities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2012. 404-405. Print. Sayers, Jentery. “Tinker-Centric Pedagogy in Literature and Language Classrooms. Collaborative Approaches to the Digital in English Studies. Ed. Laura McGrath. Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press : Computers and Composition Digital Press, 2011. 279-300. Web. 18 July 2015. Unsworth, John. "What is Humanities Computing, and What is Not?" Jahrbuch für Computerphilologie 4 (2002): n. pag. Web. 17 July 2015.
Editor's Notes
- So I have three primary frameworks that I think are useful : First, critical making as it has been described by McGann, Ramsay, and Rockwell – and how that is taken up by people like Jentery Sayers, Mark Sample, and Matt Kirschenbaum. This also relates to the “resistance in the materials” of Nowviskie and the “productive unease” that Flanders describes in creating digital models of texts.
- So I have three primary frameworks that I think are useful : First, critical making as it has been described by McGann, Ramsay, and Rockwell – and how that is taken up by people like Jentery Sayers, Mark Sample, and Matt Kirschenbaum. This also relates to the “resistance in the materials” of Nowviskie and the “productive unease” that Flanders describes in creating digital models of texts.
- Structural Rhetorical
- major project I have looked at for guidance: Trey Conatser describes teaching an XML-based FYW course at Ohio State in 2013. You can read about that in JDH 2.2 “Changing Medium, Transforming Composition” -while his project mirrors mine in many ways, a key critique I have of Conatser’s approach is that he pre-defined the markup schema according to his goals for each writing assignment. -I think this is unnecessarily prescriptive and runs counter to my theoretical framework (both critical making and exploratory markup)
- major project I have looked at for guidance: Trey Conatser describes teaching an XML-based FYW course at Ohio State in 2013. You can read about that in JDH 2.2 “Changing Medium, Transforming Composition” -while his project mirrors mine in many ways, a key critique I have of Conatser’s approach is that he pre-defined the markup schema according to his goals for each writing assignment. -I think this is unnecessarily prescriptive and runs counter to my theoretical framework (both critical making and exploratory markup) For example, in his primary source analysis, Conatser requires students to make the following formulation at least once in their documents: In at least one paragraph match evidence (details) from the primary source with the interpretations you draw from them: <seg type="ev_interp">
- Two major projects I have looked at for guidance: Trey Conatser describes teaching an XML-based FYW course at Ohio State in 2013. You can read about that in JDH 2.2 “Changing Medium, Transforming Composition” -while his project mirrors mine in many ways, a key critique I have of Conatser’s approach is that he pre-defined the markup schema according to his goals for each writing assignment. -I think this is unnecessarily prescriptive and runs counter to my theoretical framework (both critical making and exploratory markup)
- -Finally, Wendell Piez’s description of an “exploratory markup” that results in a bottom-up design of a model or schema. That is, the schema is modeled after the actually-existing tags. -This will let students tag freely, then we can discuss together how we model a schema off of what we need. -I’ll say here I’m modeling my approach off of my understanding of how the ECDA has proceeded with their customization.
- -Finally, Wendell Piez’s description of an “exploratory markup” that results in a bottom-up design of a model or schema. That is, the schema is modeled after the actually-existing tags. -This will let students tag freely, then we can discuss together how we model a schema off of what we need. -
- - ultimately, I’ll be building the visualization side of things with XSLT, but for now,
- Here you can see the different segments I marked up throughout the document, each has a simple rollover that can be customized to explain the type of segment or provide citational information. You can see color shifts in the document—green and red are organizational cues and summarizing sources; brown and blue dominate the middle and end of the document, here these tags signify argumentative synthesis and explicit connections to a future project. One can imagine some other methods being employed here—visualizations, manipulations of the textual data with python or another coding language, etc.
- Really just beginning to play with the transformational possibilities, but as of now I’ve color coded span tags and created rollover effects that prompt the rhetorical moves and/or sources tagged in the document
- The plan is to link these three(or maybe even more) stylesheets together as a way of layering the text. Students can choose to make certain markup choices explicit in certain views and not others — again, underscores the mediated nature of all texts A faceted approach allows for what Manovich calls “visualization without sampling,” which can be useful both for comparative purposes: how are these two student texts alike/different; and also as a method of distant reading: to compare across a large corpus of student texts, or the oeuvre of a single author; Do certain types of assignments result in certain rhetorical moves or strategies for students?