highlighting the past: annotation of historical texts to support humanities scholarship john bradley...

Highlighting the Past:

Annotation of historical texts to support Humanities Scholarship

John BradleyCentre for Computing in the HumanitiesKing’s College Londonjohn.bradley@kcl.ac.uk

2

A summary of my talk

in the Humanities Digital Libraries have been not entirely successful– some have contended that this is perhaps because they do not well

match fundamental techniques of scholarly research Scholars annotate their copies of text

– annotation/notetaking provide an integral part of their research technique

a review of Annotation in CS literature thoughts on annotation in Humanities Scholarship A review of tools to support annotation and notetaking Projects at KCL/CCH that contain strategies supporting scholarly

annotation Limitations in technologies, possible future directions

3

Digital Libraries

all those texts available to scholars!– The comfortable stereotype of humanists as

technophobic is no longer accurate. The availability of text and images in electronic form, coupled with the processing power of modern computers, allow the humanist to explore hypotheses and visualize relations that were previously lost in the mass of information sources.

(Wulf 1995, 48)

4

Results were Disappointing not as much uptake as had been

expected– While digital resources are becoming more visible in the

humanities, use of these resources by scholars remains limited. Humanists have come to rely on computers and electronic communication for some of their daily work, but the use of digital information resources has yet to become routine. Digitization projects are bringing texts, data sources, sound, and images to the scholar's desktop; however, the functions on which research in the humanities depend are neither well understood nor well supported by librarians.

William S. Brockman, Laura Neumann, Carole L. Palmer, Tonyia J. Tidline (December 2001): Scholarly Work in the Humanities and the Evolving Information Environment, a report from the Council on Library and Information Resources.

5

Why not a greater uptake?

“the functions on which research in the humanities depend are neither well understood nor well supported by librarians.”

“Use statistics and usability tests … are not good indicators of what is lacking in our current service and collection models”

“Through the analysis of scholars' practices we can conceptualize the type of information environment that would best support their activities” (Brockmann et al, 2001)

6

Scholarly Reading Scholars spend a large percentage of their

time reading. – ... They do background reading (textbooks),– comprehensive reading (everything possible), – continual reading (simultaneous and associative),

and – they "read around" a period or a person. – They read books and related primary material

closely—"for detail" and to become "immersed" in their area of inquiry.

Brockmann et al, 2001

7

Scholarly Research: Note Taking

note taking is an integral part of reading.– Scholars produce extensive marginal notes,

annotating photocopies or personal copies or attaching adhesive notes to a text.

– Each scholar has his or her own way of integrating handwriting and computer work.

– Most scholars use word processing programs to some degree for digesting or transcribing notes and for sketching out preliminary ideas in conjunction with reading.

Brockmann et al, 2001

8

Commentary•E.R. Dodds, Euripides: Bacchae (edited with commentary)

9

Commentary Willard McCarty, “A Network

with a thousand entrances:Commentary in an electronic age?” The Classical Commentary: Histories, Practices, Theory, ed. Roy K. Gibson and Christina Shuttleworth Kraus (Leiden: Brill, 2002): 359-402

Willard McCarty, “Simple Tools, Profound Effects: Markup, Access and Scholarly Research” (http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/wlm/essays/cork/index.html)

10

CommentarySource Commentary

Other Texts

11

CommentarySource Commentary Other Texts

v

v

“Mental Model”

12

Annotation with a Tablet Work of Catherine C

Marshall, Gene Golovchinsky, Morgan Price, Bill Schilit (PARC)

Two articles:– “From Reading to Retrieval:

Freeform Ink Annotations as Queries” (Proceedings SIGAR 1999)

– “Introducing a digital library reading appliance into a reading group” (Proceedings DL 1999)

Image: Copyright 1999 ACMUsed with permission

13

Annotation with a Tablet

Example of annotation done with a tablet computer.

Image: Copyright 1999 ACMUsed with permission

14

Analysis of Annotation in Computing Science Literature Catherine C Marshall (PARC) “Towards an Ecology of Hypertext

Annotation” (Hypertext 98, pp 40-49)– M develops a classification of kinds of

written annotation– this is followed by a study of written

annotations in textbooks

15

Marshall’s Analysis

Marshall was interested in the ways links were indicated between the printed text and annotation.

16

Marshall’s Analysis

Annotations were often attached to a text span.

A “standard” hypertext association

17

Marshall’s Analysis

Marshall examined strategies used to use annotation for emphasis

Marshall was also interested in how annotations were grouped (e.g. coloured highlighter)

18

Marshall’s Analysis: public/private annotations She was also interested in:

– what could be made out of annotations written by others

– whether annotations in different copies were similar

– what students buying the second-hand copy of the book thought of the annotations that were there.

19

Characteristics of Annotation

A response to a spot in a given source Annotations are attached to source without

altering it (they exist on an “annotation layer”) Annotations draw attention to spots so

marked possible links out to other sources, or other

spots in the same source

20

The Separation of “Source” from “Annotation” In reality, for most scholars their work is built upon editions of a

source that is prepared by others. scholarly annotation -- even if expressed as XML markup, is in

fact better modelled as layer on top of, and external, to the base “light-weight” markup

21

Digital Annotation: INote

22

Characteristics of Annotation

A response to a spot in a given source Annotations are attached to source without

altering it (they exist on an “annotation layer”) Annotations draw attention to spots so marked possible links out to other sources, or other

spots in the same source Annotations connect text to the annotator’s

mental model of the world.

23

Marshall’s “Dimensions: “digital link annotations” Formal vs. informal: Informal Explicit vs tacit: Tacit Annotation as writing vs Annotation as Reading: Reading-

oriented Hyperextensive vs. extensive vs intensive: intensive? Permanent vs transient: ?? Published vs private: private Global vs institutional vs workgroup vs personal: personal (Dynamic vs static (published)): dynamic

24

Marshall’s “Dimensions”: Dodd’s Commentary Formal vs. informal: Informal Explicit vs tacit: Explicit Annotation as writing vs Annotation as Reading:

Reading-oriented Hyperextensive vs. extensive vs intensive: Intensive? Permanent vs transient: Permanent Published vs private: Published Global vs institutional vs workgroup vs personal:

Global (Dynamic vs static (published)): Static

25

Two Annotation-related projects

Two projects underway at CCH:– Durham Liber Vitae– Online Chopin Variorum Edition

Characteristics:– both grounded in “primary” source materials– both intensive in their analysis of these sources– one uses a “formal” annotation model, the other

uses a model that is less formal

26

The Durham Liber Vitae

The Durham Liber Vitae is a manuscript which originated in the mid-ninth-century as a list of several hundred names of persons associated with a Northumbrian church, probably Lindisfarne, but possibly Monkwearmouth/Jarrow.

Around 1100 there was an addition of a list principally of monks of Durham Cathedral Priory, continuing until 16th century.

Several thousand names of lay persons were added throughout the middle ages.

(from DLV website: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/dlv/manuscript/description.html)

27

The Durham Liber Vitae

28

TEI Annotation in the DLV Light-weight markup:<div type="columnar" rend="1col"> <cb/> <ab type="group"> <handShift ink="black"/> <lb n="1"/><hi rend="dropcap">G</hi>eorgi Cuthbert et <lb n="2"/>Matilda uxor ei[…]

Intensive Markup<div type="columnar" rend="1col"> <cb/> <ab type="group"> <handShift ink="black"/> <lb n="1"/> <seg type="group">

<persName> <foreName> <hi rend="dropcap">G</hi>eorgi<expan rend="tir">us</expan> </foreName> <surname>Cuthbert</surname> </persName>

et <lb n="2"/> <persName> <foreName>Matilda</foreName> </persName> <rs type="relationship">uxor</rs> <abbr>ei<expan>us</expan></abbr> </seg>

29

Durham Liber Vitae: Person Analysis

30

DLV ER diagram

imageID

FoliofolioPosition

transcrIDtranscrName

Reference

CategoryType

DateRange

ScriptDescription

NameDateRange

PubResearch

Scribe

detailTextsourceRefFactType

Factoid

normNameoffice

biogSignifdates

Person

name

Source

linkType

PersonFactoid

likelihood

PersonIdentif

namegroupType

InterpGroup

Quality

Stint

GroupTypes:Explicit Indication:•MarkinManuscript•Rubric•JuxtapositionAssociation•Affinity•Lineage•ExplicitStatementPhilological•Lemma•LinguisticOrigin

RefIntGrp

Likehood:certainprobablepossibleunlikely

31

DLV: Annotations and Person Analysis

imageID

FoliofolioPositiontranscrName

Reference

CategoryType

DateRange

Script

DescriptionName

DateRangePubResearch

Scribe

detailTextsourceRef

Factoid

normNameoffice

biogSignifdates

Person

name

Source

type

FactCat

linkType

PersonFactoid

likelihood

PersonIdentif

kindOfFactor

Factor

namegroupType

InterpGroup

Quality

Stint

GroupTypes:Explicit Indication:•MarkinManuscript•Rubric•JuxtapositionAssociation•Affinity•Lineage•ExplicitStatementPhilological•Lemma•LinguisticOrigin

RefIntGrp

Likehood:certainprobablepossibleunlikely

32

Highly Structured Annotations

The prosopographical analysis work behind the DLV to be done by the scholars is quite formal.

The final published version of DLV will– provide a rich set of structured materials– provide many points of access

DLV has required extensive advance analysis– suitable for a major digital editorial project such as this

33

Marshall’s Annotation dimensions in DLV Formal vs. informal: highly Formal Explicit vs tacit: Explicit Annotation as writing vs Annotation as Reading: Writing-

oriented (for developers) Hyperextensive vs. extensive vs intensive: intensive? Permanent vs transient: Permanent Published vs private: Published Global vs institutional vs workgroup vs personal: Global (Dynamic vs static (published)): Static (when published)

34

DLV: Whose Annotations?

imageID

FoliofolioPositiontranscrName

Reference

CategoryType

DateRange

ScriptDescription

NameDateRange

PubResearch

Scribe

detailTextsourceRef

Factoid

normNameoffice

biogSignifdates

Person

name

Source

type

FactCat

linkType

PersonFactoid

likelihood

PersonIdentif

kindOfFactor

Factor

namegroupType

InterpGroup

Quality

Stint

GroupTypes:Explicit Indication:•MarkinManuscript•Rubric•JuxtapositionAssociation•Affinity•Lineage•ExplicitStatementPhilological•Lemma•LinguisticOrigin

RefIntGrp

Likehood:certainprobablepossibleunlikely

Project TeamMembers

Resource Users

35

DLV: Personal Annotations Too?

imageID

FoliofolioPositiontranscrName

Reference

CategoryType

DateRange

ScriptDescription

NameDateRange

PubResearch

Scribe

detailTextsourceRef

Factoid

normNameoffice

biogSignifdates

Person

name

Source

type

FactCat

linkType

PersonFactoid

likelihood

PersonIdentif

kindOfFactor

Factor

namegroupType

InterpGroup

Quality

Stint

GroupTypes:Explicit Indication:•MarkinManuscript•Rubric•JuxtapositionAssociation•Affinity•Lineage•ExplicitStatementPhilological•Lemma•LinguisticOrigin

RefIntGrp

Likehood:certainprobablepossibleunlikely

Project TeamMembers

Resource Users

Digital Library

36

Supporting the user as annotator

imageID

FoliofolioPositiontranscrName

Reference

CategoryType

DateRange

ScriptDescription

NameDateRange

PubResearch

Scribe

detailTextsourceRef

Factoid

normNameoffice

biogSignifdates

Person

name

Source

type

FactCat

linkTypePersonFactoid

likelihoodPersonIdentif

kindOfFactorFactor

namegroupType

InterpGroupQuality

Stint

GroupTypes:Explicit Indication:•MarkinManuscript•Rubric•JuxtapositionAssociation•Affinity•Lineage•ExplicitStatementPhilological•Lemma•LinguisticOrigin

RefIntGrp

Likehood:certainprobablepossibleunlikely

Project Team

?

“End User”

37

Managing Personal Annotations Annotations are originally attached to the source. Eventually they begin to exhibit their own relationships between each

other. These relationships are often thought of spatially. Sometimes these annotations can gain a structure which allows the

machine to help in organising them Through organising these notes, the annotation owner’s focus might

shift temporarily away from the source-resource to the notes themselves.

38

The Chopin Variorum Project Tools to facilitate edition & manuscript comparisons

39

“Use Cases” for Scholarly Annotations: Creation Create an annotation and attach to a spot in a

resource View annotation whenever one reviews the spot to

which it is attached Edit previously created annotation

40

CVE: Source with Annotation

41

CVE: Bar Display

42

“Use Cases” for Scholarly Annotations: Management Create an annotation and attach to a spot in a

resource View annotation whenever one reviews the spot to

which it is attached Edit previously created annotation Organise annotations conceptually Review annotations conceptually Search annotations (conceptually?)

43

Note taking Management Systems

a number developed to support “qualitative analysis” of textual materials in the Social Sciences– In qualitative analysis the texts are closely read and themes

are attached to the texts as they emerge from the reading– Themes can be presented graphically to allow them to be

reviewed, organised, and more thoroughly grasped.

Products include:– Nud*ist– Atlas.ti– Nvivo

44

Hierarchical Organisation

Nud*ist: well known software to manage and organise notetaking

Emphasises a hierarchical ordering of notes

45

CVE: Organising Annotations

46

CVE: Filing Annotations

47

CVE: Filing Annotations (2)

48

Spatial Arrangement: Lightbox Matthew Kirschenbaum, Amit Kumar, MITH, U of

Maryland

49

Spatial Organisation: Viki

Frank M Shipman,III, Catherine C Marshall, Mark LeMere: Beyond Location: Hypertext Workspaces and Non-Linear Views, Hypertext 99, pp 121-130

50

Spatial Organisation: Atlas.ti Atlas.ti’s “network editor”

51

“Use Cases” for Scholarly Annotations: Management Create an annotation and attach to a spot in a

resource View annotation whenever one reviews the spot to

which it is attached Edit previously created annotation Organise annotations conceptually Review annotations conceptually Search annotations (conceptually?) Share annotations with colleagues Discuss annotations with colleagues

52

Annotation with Browsers?

we don’t have programming resources to do GUI application development

clearly, however, GUI applications provide a better environment for developing and using annotations!– Better management of multi-window environments– Drag and drop (indeed, perhaps more gesture-based

interaction)– 2D Spatial metaphor for organising notes– Local storage for personal annotations.

53

A new publishing paradigm?