The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0403 Friday, 22 June 2007
[1] From: Norm Hinton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 14:40:08 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
[2] From: Al Magary <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 14:34:39 -0700
Subj: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
[3] From: Philip Weller <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 16:04:13 -0700
Subj: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Norm Hinton <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 14:40:08 -0500
Subject: 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
Comment: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
>Speaking of superiority, we actually feel we have a superior system
>than anything on the internet for reading Shakespeare's texts. The
>reader merely rolls over the word they don't understand and the
>glossary appears.
There is really nothing particularly new about "mouseover". The New
York Times offers the same feature every day in its on-line version, for
every news story. And I have seen the technique in Web sites at least
since the 90s.
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Al Magary <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 14:34:39 -0700
Subject: 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
Comment: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
PlayShakespeare says (http://www.playshakespeare.com/About+Us/):
"As electronic editions of Shakespeare's plays proliferate, the
need for
'through line numbers' (Charleton Hinman's system from the Norton First
Folio) vanishes due to the flexibility of systems for viewing and
printing;
not to mention the conflicts between the various editions of a
single play
(of which none are considered 'correct') so they have been removed
from our
texts. Therefore, the traditional method for actors and directors
to find
their place within a scene will more than suffice (act, scene,
number of
lines from beginning, etc.). If you really feel the need to have line
numbers in your texts, most word processing programs can easily and
automatically add the numbers for you."
I think this policy is entirely backwards and reminds me of, say, a
bank's policy being supposedly "for the customer's convenience." The
proliferation of electronic editions of Shakespeare is, by itself,
welcome, but the absence of line numbering in texts at otherwise useful
websites is an inconvenience if one has limited computer resources (eg,
small screen, not enough RAM, browser without tabs), is also using
printed editions, or in the end has to generate a proper citation to
play, act, scene, line number-in *some* standard edition. A line number
need not be gospel to be useful.
I'm wrestling with this very problem with my edition of Hall's
Chronicle. In original printed edition (1548, 1550), it has about
55,000 lines in nine chapters with very irregular pagination (the serial
count is more than 1,300 pages) and line numbers every 10 lines. The
standard edition of Hall (ed. Ellis, 1809) is 868 closely printed pages
without any line numbering. Such bulk would be intimidating without
editorial help. Webbing the chronicle will add a lot of utility-and so
will line numbers and serial page/facsimile image numbers (Penn's online
facsimile of the 1550 edition is high quality) along with pointers to
the equivalent page(s) in Ellis' edition.
Meanwhile, back at PlayShakespeare, the glosses that (will) appear with
mouse rollover sound like a nice, non-intrusive mechanism and I look
forward to full implementation because a webbed Hall's Chronicle, too,
could use considerable glossing.
Cheers,
Al Magary
[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Philip Weller <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Jun 2007 16:04:13 -0700
Subject: 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
Comment: Re: SHK 18.0394 www.PlayShakespeare.com Launched
>But once development is
>complete (another week or two), we aim to have upwards of 5000+ items
>over the coming weeks, at which time more variations on existing items
>will be added.
I opened up my Riverside Shakespeare and counted 46 notes on the first
two pages, which hold 125 lines. At that rate, there should be about
931 notes for all of Macbeth. "5000+ items" for Shakespeare's complete
works is going to be inadequate.
Putting "more variations on existing items" is not going to be useful
unless the variations are appropriate to the context. The gloss of
"chops" as "a person resembling a piece of meat," is, given the context,
disinformation, not information.
>Speaking of superiority, we actually feel we have a superior system than
>anything on the internet for reading Shakespeare's texts.
Please compare to my Macbeth: <http://clicknotes.com/macbeth/T11.html>
>No line numbers.
This is fine if you consider line numbers to be a serious distraction.
But there are many situations, including the situation of actors working
on a text, in which line numbers are highly useful.
>it's unobtrusive to the reader.
When I visited, each of the glossed words was underlined with dashes.
It's not terribly obtrusive, but does send the message that some
important information might be missed if the visitor does not roll over
the text.
--Philip Weller
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
|
