http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/tags/collaboration Digital Humanities Questions & Answers » Tag: collaboration - Recent Posts en-US Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:25:34 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/search.php http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/feedback-on-digital-humanities-best-practices-document#post-2306 Sat, 21 Mar 2015 20:51:16 +0000 ebuhe 2306@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>I'm working on a Digital Humanities Best Practices document that would serve as a list of questions humanities scholars could ask themselves as they get started on a collaborative project--something that is widely applicable, accessible, and quick and easy to read (meaning: not written in prose, not one person's reflections about their DH experience, not behind a paywall). The scope is specifically geared toward setting expectations and the issues to consider including in a charter / contract.</p> <p>It currently exists as an editable document on Google Drive -- and I'd love feedback!! What's missing, what's too broad/specific? Other great links to share? I'd especially like thoughts on integrating language re: open source, creative commons, code.</p> <p>Here's the link:<br /> <a href="http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/fineart/research/digital-humanities-best-practices.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/fineart/research/digital-humanities-best-practices.htm</a></p> <p>Thanks! </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/what-are-some-models-for-governanceeditorial-oversight-for-dh-projects#post-1974 Wed, 10 Apr 2013 13:24:24 +0000 David Michelson 1974@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>I am looking for models and best practices to ensure long term sustainability of a collaborative DH project. Could you please point me to long running DH projects whose protocols for governance, editorial oversight, institutional ownership/hosting I might emulate? I am thinking of medium sized DH projects as models, so bigger than one scholar publishing a digital project, but smaller than the TEI consortium or Jstor. Something the size of Nines or another project that has multiple contributors and a focused but regular scholarly user base.</p> <p>Given the concerns over sustainability inherent in DH, I am also interested in thoughts and advice on how to transition a project from the stage where a grant-funded PI is the leader in getting content online to where an editorial board (and institutional hosts) maintain a project longer term. Also, how do DH projects handle the preservation of content for such a project? The data will be licensed open source, but who should hold the copyright after the project is launched? A university library, an s-corporation independent of any institution (like some non-profit scholarly journals or professional societies), the public domain, the original scholarly contributors?</p> <p>Please provide links to governance structures and legal arrangement of existing projects if you are aware of them. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/collaborationproject-management-tools-for-a-small-distributed-team#post-1739 Wed, 29 Aug 2012 23:05:13 +0000 denten 1739@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>I much recommend <a href="https://trello.com/" rel="nofollow">https://trello.com/</a> as a light-weight alternative. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/collaborationproject-management-tools-for-a-small-distributed-team#post-1720 Sun, 01 Jul 2012 17:16:43 +0000 Jason Heppler 1720@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p><em>Replying to @Shane Landrum's <a href="http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/collaborationproject-management-tools-for-a-small-distributed-team#post-1715">post</a>:</em></p> <p>Hi Shane,</p> <p>I've recently begun using <a href="http://asana.com/">Asana</a>, which works well. I originally was going to go with Trac for, er, tracking tasks, bugs, etc. for our distributed team that works on the <a href="http://codyarchive.org">WFC Archive</a>. But I feel that Trac has a little bit of overhead to grasp before it becomes useful, especially for users who aren't familiar with bug tracking software to begin with. But Asana has been useful. I've divided tasks between General Tasks (which are broken down into separate sections relating to different areas of the Archive), Bugs/Issues for tracking those issues, and Wishlist where we can throw ideas to consider (but don't have a place in our current workplan yet). </p> <p>Asana is free up to 30 members, it's under active development, you can assign tasks to individual team members, you can get email reminders for tasks that are assigned to you, you can tag tasks, can set due dates, you can leave comments on tasks, you can attach files to tasks. There's a lot the app can do. They also have a mobile version, if you would need that sort of thing. I can't compare it to Atlassian, but I find it easier to use than Trac and might be worth checking out. Some of their how-to videos are also great for seeing some ideas of how they've set up Asana for different purposes. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/collaborationproject-management-tools-for-a-small-distributed-team#post-1717 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 00:47:40 +0000 Benjamin Gracy 1717@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Rally Software's Community Edition is worth mentioning and is free for up to 10 users: </p> <p><a href="http://www.rallydev.com/product-features/rally-community-edition" rel="nofollow">http://www.rallydev.com/product-features/rally-community-edition</a> </p> <p>The app has a solid team behind it, your data is safe, and there is a community of agile practitioners that can offer support. Full disclosure: I used to work there. I have no familiarity with Atlassian and can't offer any comparison. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/collaborationproject-management-tools-for-a-small-distributed-team#post-1715 Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:00:22 +0000 Shane Landrum 1715@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>I'm starting some contract work on a small, new website for a grant-funded curricular program. Between now and when the site launches, I need to communicate with a small group of non-technical faculty stakeholders/collaborators about all the usual components of a new site: wireframe prototypes, sample graphic designs, current status of work, bugs/enhancement requests, and such. For reasons related to travel and scheduling, it'll be difficult to get everyone in the same physical space before the site launches, and I need some good tools to streamline that communication.</p> <p>For these faculty, the default communication method would usually be email, but that quickly becomes unwieldy for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development">agile development approaches</a>. For some of what I need, I could cobble something together from Google tools, but I'm not ready to teach humanities faculty how to file bugs/enhancements into a <a href="http://trac.edgewall.org/">Trac</a> system. I'm looking for something a little cleaner and smoother. I don't have a private server, so I'll need either a hosted service or something that can run happily on a shared webhost. </p> <p>My software-developer friends in industry tell me that <a href="http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/overview">Atlassian Confluence</a> is a really good option for what I need. At $10/month for the hosted version with 10 users, it's cheap, but I'm reluctant to deploy something that'll be an ongoing budget expense unless it really is better than other options (i.e. less work for me). What other tools should I be considering? </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1654 Sun, 13 May 2012 19:59:56 +0000 Trevor Owens 1654@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Neat project Adam. I tend to have mixed feelings about metrics writ large. Personally, I think there are two different questions here. One is about how to cite something and one is about how people get credit for their work. </p> <p>I don't really care that much about the citation question. I think it falls into the CMS response to <a href="http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Documentation/Documentation12.html">this question</a>. </p> <blockquote><p>Cite it the same way you would “cite” your sandwich or your miniblinds or the fluff under your bathroom rug—not by trying to pretend it is a bibliographic source, but simply by telling what it is.”</p> </blockquote> <p>If someone wants to cite Zotero it doesn't matter to me if I am in any way mentioned in that citation. I'm fine with not being listed in any way on the project. I didn't design it, I didn't build it, I didn't conceive of it. I did do a lot of work as part of it, but I wouldn't think of myself as an author. With that said, if someone want's to talk about some of the things I designed and developed for outreach on the project, or about it's documentation, I likely warrant some kind of mention.</p> <p>In terms of the question of credit, I think our best bet is to treat our work more as a artists portfolio than as a stack of things that someone counts. In general, I think the whole idea of citation metrics do more harm than good. In my experience, the moment when credit matters is when you are applying for a job, or being considered for some kind of work. It is essential that anyone is able to offer up a portfolio with a list of projects and a description of what you did on those projects and what you can offer up as the indicators of your success in that project. Being mentioned on about pages for projects I've been in is nice, but in practice largely irrelevant to me. With that said, those experiences gave me everything I need to describe demonstrable skills, knowledge and abilities when I applied for a federal job. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1651 Fri, 11 May 2012 11:21:47 +0000 DavidBeavan 1651@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Adam, In my experience it varies from institution to institution. I don't think it's ever a direct policy to preclude individuals from credit, rather it's indirect and is due to naivety. If those responsible for maintaining the repository only allow certain classes of staff (e.g. academic/research) to be featured, then this cuts out those on other contracts. So, if somebody is employed as a database/web designer; then as they don't exist in the repository brain, they don't get credited there.</p> <p>Of course, some repositories only list publications, and fall short of capturing resources too, which is even worse. The traditional model of who is credited for contributions to research outputs needs to be more flexible, certainly when it comes to DH. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1643 Thu, 10 May 2012 02:49:59 +0000 acrymble 1643@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Jason, thanks for your thoughts. I like your practical approach to extending the guidelines of the Medical Journal Editors. And thanks also for that twitter exchange; I had missed that.</p> <p>David, thanks for the correction on the REF. I'm curious about your comment that non-academic staff cannot be named alongside their work in institutional repositories. Is this a policy in UK universities? This obviously isn't an issue in the wider world. Illustrators on children's books for example are often listed in libraries despite their "alternative" role in the creative process. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1642 Wed, 09 May 2012 09:31:51 +0000 DavidBeavan 1642@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>I can only speak from my experience in the UK (BTW the REF is UK wide, not just England). DH projects have included an About page, which lists those involved and their responsibilities. While that is a help, it does not necessarily constitute a citation.</p> <p>This is where we bump into cultural role traditions: academics do research, non academics (alt-ac) do not. This model may hold true in traditional humanities scholarship (if there is such a thing), where the research and the writing of an article is performed solely by academics. With DH project work, a diverse team is assembled, often including those who are not academics. This sadly leads to situations where non-academic staff cannot be named alongside their work in institutional repositories etc, simply because their job title or job family excludes them from that possibility. This completely ignores the collaborative processes involved in the creation of DH resources and projects.</p> <p>Personally, I would welcome a citation system that includes all those who have made a major contribution to the project, listing their roles or responsibilities. That seems a fair approach to me. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1638 Thu, 03 May 2012 12:33:45 +0000 Jason Heppler 1638@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p><em>Replying to @<a href='/profile/acrymble'>acrymble</a>'s <a href="http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1536">post</a>:</em></p> <p>Hi Adam,</p> <p>Here's a discussion that occurred on Twitter this morning that might have some relevance. I'm placing it here for reference:</p> <blockquote><p> @karikraus Curious if DH tweeps are starting to adopt "order of authorship" conventions from the sciences or listing collaborators alphabetically. [+] <a href="https://twitter.com/karikraus/status/198049750166142976">[link]</a></p> <p>@karikraus With a joint appt. that crosses the sciences &amp; humanities, I have a mix of both on my CV. [-] <a href="https://twitter.com/karikraus/status/198049823902007297">[link]</a></p> <p>@<a href='/profile/melissaterras'>melissaterras</a> @karikraus good question. I have known wars to erupt over it. <a href="https://twitter.com/melissaterras/status/198051517566169089">[link]</a></p> <p>@karikraus @<a href='/profile/melissaterras'>melissaterras</a> What's your practice, Melissa? Also a mix, depending on venue and collaborators? <a href="https://twitter.com/karikraus/status/198051655311302656">[link]</a></p> <p>@geoffrockwell @karikraus We tend to use a hybrid - first couple of authors are those that led and the rest in alpha order <a href="https://twitter.com/geoffrockwell/status/198051678979756033">[link]</a></p> <p>@<a href='/profile/melissaterras'>melissaterras</a> @karikraus in general, person who does most writing is first author. Then list everyone (alphabetically?) &amp; see if anyone starts shouting. <a href="https://twitter.com/melissaterras/status/198052407626829826">[link]</a></p> <p>@karikraus @<a href='/profile/melissaterras'>melissaterras</a> Otherwise, rinse &amp; repeat? ;-) <a href="https://twitter.com/karikraus/status/198052764893450240">[link]</a></p> <p>@<a href='/profile/melissaterras'>melissaterras</a> @karikraus yeah. We've found @sruecker's project charter really helpful; get people to agree in advance. <a href="https://twitter.com/melissaterras/status/198053340037394433">[link]</a> </p></blockquote> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1637 Thu, 03 May 2012 12:23:09 +0000 Jason Heppler 1637@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p><em>Replying to @<a href='/profile/acrymble'>acrymble</a>'s <a href="http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1536">post</a>:</em></p> <p>Adam,</p> <p>I think this is a really great topic for us to be considering. I'm involved in two different ways of citing contributors to a project, so I'll add this as fuel for thought--</p> <p>At projects at the Center for Digital Research in the Humanities, we use our project About pages to list the roles that everyone in a project contributes to. This includes roles that change over time (for example, I'm listed twice on the <a href="http://codyarchive.org/staff/">Cody Archive staff page</a>, first as a research editor and then as project manager). This sort of credit page, I believe, is similar across various CDRH projects.</p> <p>The second area where I'm having to think through these issues is with an article I'm co-authoring with some collaborators. During the fall 2011 semester, I was enrolled in the digital humanities seminar with Prof. William G. Thomas, and one of the projects we had in the class was to build an iOS application. Towards the end of the course we decided as a group that we wanted to author an article about our experience (which is currently in progress). However, not everyone in the seminar had an interest or the time to contribute to a written piece -- so, I'm working with three others to draft the essay. However, we also did not want to leave out our fellow seminar colleagues -- they obviously contributed to the iOS app and, thus, deserve credit for their contributions (even if they are not part of the essay side). So, what we have done is to list the four of us as authors alphabetically, and we cite our colleagues (alphabetically) in the footnotes as contributors to the project. We have made it clear to them that they can cite this on their C.V.'s even though their names may not appear on the byline. In this case, it's more about acknowledgements rather than authorship.</p> <p>My other thought on this (which I think follows other conventions) is to take a "science-y" approach and list everybody. What I would envision here is listing the author(s) that do the most writing first then follow with the rest of the contributors alphabetically. But that's for published projects. I think it's slightly more complicated with digital projects that have continual evolution and, by extension, revolving collaborators (people come and go, collaborators take on new roles, etc). Listing everyone on the Cody About page, for example, would become unwieldy to place on a C.V.</p> <p>I do like the general themes of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors you cite above. So, authorship for digital projects could follow similar themes and lay these out clearly in a project narrative (as Bethany notes above). Using their model, we might think about:</p> <ul> <li>Defining authorship around 1) substantial quality intellectual content; 2) the contribution of data, analysis, or interpretation; 3) public responsibility for the quality of the project. The acquisition of funding is a contribution, but perhaps not authorship credit.</li> <li>Authorship and credit should be clearly established at the beginning of a project. The principals of a project should be generous in their shared credit and inclusion.</li> <li>Contributors not listed as authors have to claim their own stake and responsibility in a project. They perhaps cannot speak about the project as a whole (say, to the public or to a hiring committee) but can discuss their role(s) within the project.</li> <li>There should be a sense of shared knowledge production that should be conveyed in credit, no matter the rank, status, or contribution of an individual.</li> </ul> <p>Anyways, these are some quick and dirty thoughts. There are a lot of other issues to think about (should digital centers represent large, multi-group projects?) but hopefully I've added a little food for thought. This is a topic I think about often, so I'll be closely watching FairCite and the discussions that continue around it. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1617 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:55:51 +0000 acrymble 1617@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p><em>Replying to @Bethany Nowviskie's <a href="http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/faircite-who-should-we-cite-in-collaborative-dh-projects#post-1549">post</a>:</em></p> <p>Thanks Bethany,</p> <p>I have been keeping an eye on Twitter. I appreciate the discussion you've been having at the Scholar's Lab and I look forward to hearing more about what you'll come up with. I think leading by example is a great way to test what works and what doesn't. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/support-for-a-multi-media-poetry-translation-website#post-1577 Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:00:51 +0000 Bethany Nowviskie 1577@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Depending on your ambitions for a project like this, many digital humanities centers would need some outside support in order to assist with a effort by someone outside their home institutions. <a href="http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/im-considering-a-move-to-the-chicago-area-whats-the-dh-scene-like-there">Start-up funding</a> from an NEH grant, for instance, would help. And regional <a href="http://thatcamp.org">THATCamp</a> events are often excellent places to meet up with faculty and staff from DH centers, publishers, humanities agencies, and cultural heritage institutions and find out about opportunities to collaborate.</p> <p>You may also want to register on the new <a href="http://dhcommons.org/">DH Commons site</a>, which is designed for people seeking collaborators or offering collaborative opportunities.</p> <p>If you are looking for publishing platforms or journals that support multi-media work, you should consider <a href="http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/">MediaCommons</a> and <a href="http://vectors.usc.edu/journal/index.php?page=Introduction">Vectors</a>. The Vectors team is also working on a new digital publishing tool, <a href="http://scalar.usc.edu/anvc/?page_id=6">Scalar</a>. </p> http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/topic/support-for-a-multi-media-poetry-translation-website#post-1559 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 04:36:31 +0000 snehaadesai@gmail.com 1559@http://digitalhumanities.org/answers/ <p>Hi, I am a Fulbright Scholar working on translation practice and theory. I'd like to solicit ideas for organizations that would support a multi-media presentation of the translations I am writing. Ideally, I would work with an organization that it invested in innovation in digital publishing, and the humanities.</p> <p>Just throwing this out there for ideas--thanks! </p>