Minutes Pisa 2010

From IntereditionWiki

Apologies from (Joris will add the names)

Amended to the agenda:

  • New item 4: A short round of introductions for new people
  • Cooperation Interedition and Canada
  • Added to item 5: organization of the last lap of the Action

5. Joris van Zundert (Chair COST Action IS0704 'Interedition') summarizes the state of the Action. In the first years, in meetings bootcamps the Interedition group explored a mode of cooperation to build a model for collaborative development and for interoperability in textual scholarship and related digital tools. Most meetings concerned Working Group 2, Prototyping, and at the beginning also Working Group 3. Working group 2 established the model of 'boot camps' for developers and researchers utilizing the COST STSMs (Short Term Scientific Missions of at least five consecutive days) or Workshop instruments. Five bootcamps were organized until now (Pisa, Dublin, Gothenburg, Firenze, and Munich). Focus was on textual collation. Collation is a readily identifiable part of many editorial work flows. A large part of which can be automated and thus supported with computational means. This can take a lot of work (but not all, eg. the interpretative part) from the shoulders of the editors.

The bootcamps until now attract groups of 8 to 10 developers, who together are beginning to form the seedling for an open source development community within the textual scholarly research community. This model for cooperation in development works very well and will certainly be extended in the rest of the Action. This new community of developers of scholarly tools is a great asset to the textual scholarship community. Many tools made in the past for individual projects are never used in other projects (or not at all). The cooperative development model and the forthcoming model for interoperable architecture are important means to battle that defect.

THATcamps (http://thatcamp.org/) are interesting meetings for exchange on ideas for digital architecture and approach as well, but shorter than the five-day-minimum of our bootcamps, and more focused on discussion than development. But they have a comparable exchange of ideas and cooperation. We would like to connect at least some of the next bootcamps to THATcamps. To keep this efficient model of collaboration alive after the end of our Action, we also need to look for another organizational/financial frame work in which to continue this.

The main prototype tool deliverable the developers in the bootcamps have been working on until now is a new collation tool, CollateX (a successor to Peter Robinson's Collate). The active developers are Ronald Haentjens Dekker, Gregor Middell, Tara Andrews, Leif Jöran Olsson, Doug Reside, Nick Laiacona and a number of others. The first beta version is available in Sourceforge (http://collatex.sourceforge.net/). Our Action in fact presents not only the proof of concept of the collation tool itself, but also of the distributed architecture idea of micro services behind it and the way of open source development collaboration that got the tools into being. The tools are now available as individual back end web services, these back ends offer an development interface, not a GUI (though they may have a GUI as well). This type of interface is highly usable for IT developers, not for end users (scholars etc.). The idea (and so now proven concept) is that these micro services can be 'mashed' or 'piped' together to create larger scholarly useful work flows. A light weight (low development footprint) Graphical User Interface that shows this pipelining is available at http://interedition-tools.appspot.com/. However this is proof of concept, beta. Only short texts can be collated since Google (who's cloud servicing is used for part of the work flow) is not happy with response times (although they are extremely fast, typically < 3 secs.!). Google AppSpot and free cloud services alike are used as the means for independent contributing developers and researchers to store and publish their code in a cloud computing fashion. So here again the proof of concept is delivered that the development model we have in mind actually works. The architectural model can be summarized as having tools created in different programming languages, on different servers, in different places, by anyone, but being interoperable by a very light weight protocol for input output piping using well established open data formats (JSON/TEI/HTML etc.) A major task now is to think of ways to promote the proof of concept into a production level product/tool and to disseminate the cooperation and architecture models.

---edited until here JZ---Interedition now has to make some choices, since our funding for meetings and bootcamps is limited. We can focus on making the current CollateX available in a good user interface, or start working on some other tools that are useful for textual scholars. Earlier meetings pointed to images and image annotation, recently transcription has also been mentioned. In a transcription tool, we could focus on creating webservices that would interlink (parts of) e.g. Pinakes and Talia, and others. We would all want data from one tool to be movable to another tool. This model would open up open access data, from the point of view of interoperability. Reaching out to further open access of data could be one of our aims in our dissemination. We also have to think of ways to get more funding.

What is a very interesting opportunity is the interest that especially DARIAH is now showing towards Interedition. DARIAH and CLARIN are two big projects, which really need the kind of content and ideas Interedition has developed. So a link with them is wise. Our dissemination in 2011 needs to also focus on these two big projects.

It would also be wise to organize a meeting of different COST Actions, disseminating amongst the Actions. This could also be important for the standing Committee for thge Humanities and social Sciences. Andrea Bozzi can help with this.

In our dissemination we should point out that we devised a model of collaboration, on a social as well as a technical level, and that we have developed tools. This we need to sommunicate to everybosy but especially for DARIAH and CLARIN, and perhaps also Europeana. This may lead us to new funding possibilities.

Anissava remarks that the Balkan states are missing from DARIAH and in a way also from CLARIN. So Interediion here has a strong position. The tools developed will also be tested in the Balkan countries, and Anissava can organize a workshop in Sofia some time in 2012.

Daniel advises us to anticipate the take-of of the e-book. Interedtion should also keep that in mind in planning and dissemination.

Sakari adds that we should provide the world with a description of the tools we have, but also of the ones we could develop, to tease interested partners.

End February: Interedition bootcamp in Trier 23-25 March: THATcamp in Florence (a.o. about Zotero); cf. http://www.thatcampflorence.org/. The local organizer is Serge Noiret

ElPub: 22-24 June 2011, Istanbul. This is very interesting conference on Electronic Publishing, with a focus on Cultural Heritage, Libraries, Archives and Museum digital projets (http://www.elpub.net/). CFP deadline is January 10, 2011.

September 26–28, 2011. Berlin, Germany: ECDL. The European Conference on Digital Libraries (http://www.tpdl2011.org/).

24-27 May 2011 - Prague, Czech republic: ELAG. European Library Automation Group (http://www.techlib.cz/en/1176-elag-2011/) This is mostly a conference for IT in Libraries, more than the ECDL but it could be a good showcase for Interedition; this needs to be checked.

First week of May 2011: next Working Group meeting Workshop such as in Jerusalem again e.g. in Sofia (Anissava could organize a workshop at the beginning od 2012 (not in 2011) 22-27 August 2011, Sofia: a session about Interedition linkied to the Byzantine conference organized by Anissava June 2012: Panel proposal was submitted for DH2011, good dissemination chance June: another bootcamp? ECDL and ELAG Conferences: Federico will send information to Joris. Any other ideas of suitable dissemination opportunities? Daniel suggests meetings of other COST actions. Joris thinks Interedition could indeed organize such a meeting, for dissemination between COST Actions. Could take place in Brussels. Daniel suggests the COST Office should arrange this.

Joris reports that due to the new system COST in using for its organization, our Action will probably a bit delayed - ending not in April 2012 but e.g. in September or October. This may be useful for our dissemination plans. Brussels has August as its holiday month. July would be the most favorable for a concluding meeting.

There are plans for a conference for dissemination to textual scholars. Barbara is willing to organize this. It could be linked to the next ESTS which will take place in Germany in January 2012. Barbara asks if the conference could be hosted at Huygens Instituut in The Hague. December 2011 is another possibility.

Next MC meeting: November 2011?

Preparing the Roadmap: cf. London minutes. Small change of plans: the first small draft to be presented by Andrea Bozzi on February 17 in Brussels can function as the first step towards an overview of the Roadmap. This will then have to be discussed in the May 2011 working group.

Joris will draft a first version of the roadmap the week after the ESTS and send it around for comments. Tomorrow Joris will gather items to mention from all who are available at the morning session. Andrea will then get it in two weeks time.

Karina reports on the work that Kathryn Piquette is now doing for Interedition dissemination. This seems to go very well. She will also think about how to make the front page a bit more inviting, luring visitors to the wiki where the actual information can be found. Links to interviews, or moving images, e.g. pictures of Interedition persons or things. Karina will ask Kathryn to think on this a bit further. Screencasts?