View the h-oieahc Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-oieahc's March 1996 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in h-oieahc's March 1996 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the h-oieahc home page.
Just a note of congratulations and an expression of absolute agreement with Joan Gunderson for her extremely well-conceived response to the discussion concerning accuracy in web-based documents. None of us would purchase or borrow an edited/reproduced collection of documents without knowing that they had been selected, transcribed, and edited by a well respected expert in the field under rigorous standards of documentary editing. Yet the heady enticement of quick and free supply over the net has seduced us into an expressed willingness to accept lesser standards simply because the supply medium is different. Needless to say, amateurs will continue to put out poorly edited versions of documents in print which we, as professionals, will continue to eschew using. Let's hope that we will show the same degree of restraint in accepting such products that emerge in the electronic world. A suggestion might be to work out a consortium between H-NET and the national centers for historical editing so that we, as historians, can begin an orderly process for making already edited documents available and to issue authorization for the collection and posting of new documents which would meet our professional standards. There are, after all, any number of programs out there which focus on nothing other than training documentary editors (is this a potential growth industry for "public" historians, I wonder). Until we take such action, I think we must approach net-based documents with a grain of salt and continue to use microfilm and other readily distributed media for serious documentary research. C: Christopher L. Miller University of Texas--Pan American