The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0301 Monday, 19 May 2008
[1] From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 16 May 2008 13:15:55 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
[2] From: C S Lim <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 17 May 2008 09:23:42 +0800
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
[3] From: Martin Mueller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 16 May 2008 21:34:24 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
[4] From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 17 May 2008 13:45:18 +0100
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
[5] From: John Drakakis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 19 May 2008 17:00:55 +0100
Subj: RE: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Evett <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 16 May 2008 13:15:55 -0400
Subject: 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
David Lindley's question about the durability of electronic text is
hardly "naive"; there's stuff in the box of 5 1/4" floppy disks on top
if tallest bookcase that I would like to be able to get at but could now
only do so at very considerable expense. And it's only a dozen years
old. No doubt many capable people in publishing and library work and
computer design are aware of the problem and working on it, but in the
context we need to add to the traditional enemies of our goods, moth and
rust, new ones that include planned obsolescence and maybe the
possibility that the great-great-grandmother of all solar flares will
generate an electro-magnetic storm big enough to corrupt every hard
drive on the planet.
Apocalyptically,
David Evett
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: C S Lim <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 17 May 2008 09:23:42 +0800
Subject: 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Surely more sophisticated technology or software will be able to read
material even in obsolete forms in text versions at least. One worries
about one's own files stored in privately kept media which might
eventually be inaccessible or easily accessible because technology has
moved on. And, of course, CDs and the rest of it are subject to decay, alas.
C S Lim
[3]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Mueller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Friday, 16 May 2008 21:34:24 -0500
Subject: 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
This is not a naive question at all. We owe much of the heritage of
print literature to the fact that prior to some point in the 1800s the
only kind of paper people knew how to make was a material that under
ordinary conditions would last for a century. Had they known how to make
cheap paper with lots of acid, much would have been lost . . .
Paper isn't intrinsically a long-term material. Multiple copies help,
and a digital preservation system is called LOCKSS, an acronym for lots
of copies keep stuff safe.
But preservation is in the long run a social rather than technical
matter. It is probably the case that modern librarians, at least in
research environments, worry more systematically about long-term
preservation than they did in earlier ages. But they had better keep
worrying.
[4]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Saturday, 17 May 2008 13:45:18 +0100
Subject: 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
David Lindley asks:
>. . . how far can one guarantee the future of articles/books etc.
>'published' solely in electronic form?
It's a fair question, but applies equally to the print media. We tend
to assume that print endures, but it is worth considering how that
longevity has come about. Certainly, the print media are inherently more
stable than the electronic/magnetic media, although one might argue that
the optical media-holes punched into metal disks-have the advantages of
digital without the disadvantages of electro-magnetism.
But, aside from the occasional disasters of acidic paper and fires, the
question isn't really one of form but of access. Only with the
systematic collection of printed materials in libraries came the kind of
permanence than we habitually associate with the print media. That is,
we rely on the principle that if one visits a sufficiently comprehensive
library, or can have material fetched from one, everything ever printed
is available to us.
We have to ask why this effort to conserve knowledge in printed form
came about. It is hard to see it being done for the benefit of arts and
humanities scholars, and my suspicion is that we have only really
hitched a ride on the shirt-tails of the science and technology
disciplines. When printed matter was the only way to conserve knowledge,
there were good economic reasons to organize large repositories
(libraries), and if the economically useful material was to be conserved
why not save everything?
Without the ongoing effort at systematizing the storage of the
materials, libraries would be no more useful than badly-run used book
stores. The digital media need organization too, but of different kinds.
Books are not self-descriptive, so the creation of indices (catalogues
to collections) takes a lot of work. But books don't take much
preservation: kept at the right temperature and humidity, they will
remain readable for hundreds of years. Digital media are, to a
significant degree, self-descriptive, in the sense that without any
additional work they can be interrogated to see if particular notions
(expressed by key words) are present in them. But they don't 'keep' if
left unexamined: they are best recopied to new media and new formats
periodically.
Books and digital media both require extensive human attention if they
are to be useful to readers. The attention is simply different in each
case. We ought not to assume that either will get that attention simply
because WE want to preserve knowledge. If those who pay for knowledge
preservation cease to see good uses for it, neither print nor digital
media may endure.
Gabriel Egan
[5]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Drakakis <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Monday, 19 May 2008 17:00:55 +0100
Subject: 19.0298 A Problem of Access
Comment: RE: SHK 19.0298 A Problem of Access
The answer is, David, that you can't. BUT also given the activities of
Directors of Information Services (aka librarians) these days, you can't
even guarantee the survival rates of books either. Things ought to be
different, but the bean counters are now in charge!
Cheers,
John Drakakis
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email 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.