Fretful tags amid the verbiage: Issues in the representation of modern manuscript material

Literary and Linguistic Computing

Volumn 21, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2006, Pages 99-111

  Neyt, Vincent ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749671365     PISSN: 02681145     EISSN: 14774615     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/llc/fql002     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bosak, J. and Brady, T. (1999). XML and the Second-Generation Web. Scientific American, 5/99: 79-83. http://www.sciam.com/ article.cfm?articleID=0008C 786-91DB-1CD6-B4A8809EC588EEDF (last accessed February 2006).
2. Ferrer, D. (1998). The open space of the draft page: James Joyce and modern manuscripts. In Bornstein, George and Tinkle, Theresa (eds), The Iconic Page in Manuscript, Print, and Digital Culture. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 249-67.
3. Gabler, H. W. (2002). For ulysses: A once and a future edition. Variants. The Journal of the European Society for Textual Scholarship, 1: 85-105.
4. Hastings, K. V. (2001). Rebuilding the Salisbury Image Archive. Using XSLT to Replace Proprietary Software, (draft). Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities, University of Virginia, rough draft, available at http://bodoni.village.virginia.edu:2020/servlet/ DefaultApplyXSL/documentation/dynaXML.xml?xslURL=/documentation/xsl/ dynaxml.xsl (last accessed November 2004).
5. Hay, L., Luccioni, J. M., and Gabler, H. W. (1987). Genetic editing, past and future: A few reflections by a user. Text: Transactions of the Society for Textual Scholarship, 3: 117-133.
6. Hayman, D. (1963). A First-Draft Version of 'Finnegans Wake'. Austin: University of Texas Press.
7. Martens, G. (1990). Immer noch 'Wissenschaft auf Abwegen?'? Jahrbuch der Deutschen Schillengesellshaft, 34: 398-403.
8. McCarty, W. (2003). Humanities computing. In Miriam Drake (ed.), Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 2nd edn, (New York: Dekker, 2003), pp. 1224-35. Quoted from a preliminary draft online at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/wlm/essays/encyc/ (last accessed February 2006).
9. Piez, W. (2000). XSL: Characteristics, Status and Potentials for the Humanities. Paper ALLC/ACH 2000. Slides available from http://www.mulberrytech.com/papers/achallc2000.zip) (last accessed February 2006).
10. Piez, W. (2001). Beyond the 'descriptive vs. procedural' distinction. Markup Languages: Theory and Practice, 3(2): 141-72.
11. Renear, A. (2001). The descriptive/procedural distinction is flawed. Markup Languages: Theory and Practice, 2(4): 411-20.
12. Robinson, P. M. W. (2002). What is a Critical Digital Edition? Variants. The Journal of the European Society for Textual Scholarship, 1: 43-62.
13. Shillingsburg, P. (2002). Manuscript, Book and Text in the 21st Century. Variants. The Journal of the European Society for Textual Scholarship, 1: 19-31.
14. Streuvels, S. (2000). De teleurgang van den Waterhoek, electronic-critical edition by Marcel De Smedt and Edward Vanhoutte, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press.
15. Vanhoutte, E. (2002). Putting Time Back in Manuscripts. Text Ontology, Critique Génétique and Modern Manuscripts. Paper ALLC/ACH 2002.
16. Van Hulle, D. (1999). Authenticity or hyperreality in hypertext editions. Notes towards a searchable 'Recherche'. HumanIT 1/1999: 227-244. http://www.hb.se/bhs/ith/1-99/dvh.htm (last accessed February 2006).
17. Van Hulle, D. (2004) Textual Awareness. A Genetic Study of Late Manuscripts by Joyce, Proust, and Mann. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
18. Van Vliet, H. T. M. (2002). Electronic editions: New solutions for old editing problems or old wine in new bottles? Variants. The Journal of the European Society for Textual Scholarship, 1: 63-83.