Biblio Citation Abstract
Kochumman, R., Monroy C., Deng J., Furuta R., & Urbina E. (2004).  Tools for a New Generation of Scholarly Edition Unified by a Tei-based Interchange Format. Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries. 368–369.

This article details the creation of the Electronic Variorum Edition of Cervantes' Don Quixote. The authors here explore how digital editions open up the world of scholarly editing to include presentation modes and visual artefacts that were not able to be produced in print. The authors discuss the MVED (Multi-Variant Editor for Documents), VERI (Virtual Edition Reader's Interface), and Text2TEI tools and explain their significant role in the building of this digital edition.

[Anonymous] (2011).  American Literature Scholar in the Digital Age. (Earhart, A. E., & Jewell A., Ed.).

Earhart and Jewell's collection The American Literature Scholar in the Digital Age explores the scholarly pursuits of individuals studying "American content in diverse and provocative ways." "What unites all of these essays is that they are concerned with the study of “American literature” and the interaction of that scholarly pursuit with digital technology." The anthology is aimed at a varied community of scholars and instructors who are vaguely or passionately interested in how media intersects with the study of American literature and culture. Earhart and Jewell argue through the collection that using digital methods illuminates new ways of "seeing, collecting, editing, visualizing, and analyzing works of literature."

Viscomi, J. (2002).  Digital Facsimiles: Reading the William Blake Archive. Computers and the Humanities. 36, 27–48.

In this article Joseph Viscomi critically address the issues presented with digital transcription and digital facsimile specific to the case of unique Romantic poet/illustrator William Blake. The failures to capture the physical qualities of Blake's text in modern print led to the creation of the Blake Archive in 1993. Overall, the Archive responds to all of the needs of such a varied body of work. The Blake Archive's attention to technological innovation and consistent privileging of the original work make it the "first place to stop when studying Blake." The Archive continues to strive to be a "pacesetting instance of a fundamental shift in the ideas of 'archive,' 'catalogue,' and 'edition' as both processes and products."

O’Donnell, D. Paul (2009).  Back to the future: what digital editors can learn from print editorial practice. Literary and Linguistic Computing. 24, 113–125.

In this article, Daniel O'Donnell examines the questions of theory, practice, and form when it comes to creating a digital edition. O'Donnell begins by acknowledging the various departures from the "normal" edition that are made possible in the digital medium: interactivity with uses, multiple displays, virtual realities, and decentred texts. However, O'Donnell argues that, despite the assumed divide, the print edition may inform and shape the trajectory of the digital in more ways than are anticipated. O'Donnell draws on the Old English text Caedmon's Hymn as a case study to show that the future of the digital lies in the print practices of the past.

Pierazzo, E. (2011).  A rationale of digital documentary editions. Literary and Linguistic Computing.

In this article, Elena Pierazzo argues for and illustrates the differences between print and digital editions. Pierazzo uses the Jane Austen's Fiction Manuscripts website as a case study. Pierazzo asserts that all editions - including digital editions - present selections of facts through an interpretive lens. However, whereas with print editions the medium of publication inhibited the types of selections scholars could make, the digital medium is face with the opposite issue - where to stop. Pierazzo suggest that editors consider the purpose of the edition, the intended audience of the edition, and the nature of the document they are working with when making their selections. Pierazzo concludes with a discussion on the purpose of including a facsimile alongside a diplomatic transcription edition.

Lavagnino, J. (2009).  Access. Literary and Linguistic Computing. 24, 63–76.

In this article, John Lavagnino discusses the current status of textual editions: how they are compiled, how they succeed, and how they fail. Lavagnino begins by creating a distinction between the mandates of digital editions and digital libraries. He moves on to discussing the biggest barriers preventing successful digital editions: the incorporation of two audiences. Lavagnino argues that the goal of catering to both a critical, literary audience and an editorial audiences sets digital editions up for limited success. Lavagnino argues that to overcome this challenge editions must be vigilant in providing the right material not all material. It is suggested that editions redefine themselves as criticism with textual access instead of text access and criticism in order to achieve great success.

Saklofske, J. (2013).  Fluid Layering: Reimagining digital literary archives through dynamic, user-generated content. Scholarly and Research Communication. 3,

In this article, Jon Saklofske discusses the dynamic digital edition platform NewRadial. Saklofske opens by discussing the untapped potential of digital editions to create a space for user engagement and a critical dialogue. Saklofske critiques the siloed approach of many current digital editions arguing that they neglect the dynamic and multimodal potential of an online environment. Saklofske uses the examples of William Blake, the Blake Archive, and NewRadial’s exploration of Blake to showcase how the integration of tools, data, and user generated content bolsters the usefulness of an edition.

Carlquist, J. (2004).  Medieval Manuscripts, Hypertext and Reading. Visions of Digital Editions. Literary and Linguistic Computing. 19, 105–118.

In this article, Jonas Carlquist draws connections between the composition of medieval manuscripts and hypertext theory in order to suggest best practices for creating manuscript-based digital editions. Carlquist argues that the multisequential order, authorship, and physical linking features present in medieval manuscripts mimic the types of characteristics of hypertext. With these qualities in mind, Carlquist urges digital editions of manuscripts to acknowledge the importance of multiple textual witnesses. Additionally, he emphasizes that the editions should provide zoomable, facsimile images that are both printer-friendly and screen-friendly (i.e. provide hyperlinks).

Ore, E. S. (2004).  Monkey Business—or What is an Edition?. Literary and Linguistic Computing. 19, 35–44.

In this article, Ore responds to Peter Robinson’s (assumed) claim that the only worthwhile textual editions are those that advanced scholarly criticism. Ore refutes this argument by demonstrating how scholarly editions can be valuable research tools despite their lack of critical appeal. To conclude this article, Ore recounts and builds about Edward Vanhoutte’s criteria for an electronic, scholarly edition.

Robinson, P. (2009).  What text really is not, and why editors have to learn to swim. Literary and Linguistic Computing. 24, 41–52.

In this article, Peter Robinson addresses the evolution of the edition from print to digital. Robinson questions what types of editions are being made in the digital medium and why. In order to explore this, Robinson looks at linguistic and bibliographic codes as well as the definitions of "text", "good transcription", and "correct edition." Robinson argues that an edition is a "system of signs" agreed upon by an audience. In conclusion, Robinson asserts that the "greatest promise" of digital editions are their ability to present a high quality publication to a wide and diverse audience.

Clement, T. (2011).  Knowledge Representation and Digital Scholarly Editions in Theory and Practice. Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative.

In this article, Tanya Clement uses the case study of Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven’s unpublished poetry to explore knowledge representation and scholarly editing. Clement begins by describing the nature of Freytag-Loringhoven’s work and the structure of the digital edition built using TEI and the Versioning Machine. Clement asserts that the theory behind this digital edition comes from John Bryant’s notion of the fluid text. Clement acknowledges that there are varying opinions on the usefulness of the digital space for creating editions, but that in this case, the medium was superior for representing the poems as versions.

Hedges, M.., Jordanous A.., Dunn S., Roueche C.., Kuster M.W.., Selig T.., et al. (2012).  New models for collaborative textual scholarship. 2012 6th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems Technologies (DEST). 1–6.

In this article, the authors present tools encouraging and facilitating collaborative scholarship. The authors acknowledge that past and present digital work has been siloed and segregated. The authors argue that pursuing resource interconnectedness is the key to success. The authors begin by discussing TEI, RDF, and linked data. They move on to exploring tools for collaborative scholarship such as TextGrid and TXTvre. Throughout the publication, the authors refer to gnomologic texts as their case study and use these texts to expose the importance of interconnectedness.

Gabler, H. Walter (2010).  Theorizing the Digital Scholarly Edition. Literature Compass. 7, 43–56.

In this essay Walter Gabler advocates for viewing a textual edition as more than a sum of its parts but rather as a coherent structure. Gabler asserts that building connection between seemingly disparate parts of an edition would exponentially increase the usefulness of the resource. Additionally, Gabler argues that all textual editions are personalized because they are mediated through an editor. According to Gabler, these edited texts - especially those in digital form - comprise the basic building blocks of study and scholarship today. In closing, Gabler argues that distilling and engendering cultural critique is the task and vision of digital editions moving forward.

Smith, M. Nell (2004).  Electronic scholarly editing. (Siemens, R., & Schreibman S., Ed.).A Companion to Digital Literary Studies. 306–322.

In this second essay in a series on electronic scholarly editing, Martha Nell Smith strives to define and differentiate print editing from electronic editing. Smith discusses how editorial practices have shifted with the advent of digital editing. She emphasizes the transparency of electronic scholarly editing in its ability to represent the text's physicality more fully through digital reproductions rather than the distillation of a text that occurs in the print editing process. Additionally, Smith argues that electronic editing has promoted and increased the viability of scholarly collaboration. Smith asserts that these types of collaborative, polygraphic works should be the future of digital humanities publications.

Flanders, J. (1997).  Trusting the Electronic Edition. Computers and the Humanities. 31, 301–310.

Julia Flanders begins this article by acknowledging the current debate regarding images in electronic editions. Flanders quickly asserts that this debate is merely a facet of the larger questions of how do editions produce knowledge and what types of information do we want edition providing to an audience? Flanders argues that the web has opened up an immense number of alternatives and enhancements to textuality. The pro/anti image debate is a manifestation of these options. Flanders argues that the varying opinions in this debate evidence the multitude of edition pedagogies at play in the humanities discipline. Looking forward, Flanders proposes that the documentary information presented by images may soon be rivalled by text encoding practices, such as TEI.

Lavagnino, J. (1997).  Electronic Editions and the Needs of Readers. Critical Survey. 9, 70–77.

Lavagnino begins by acknowledging that the scholarly ideal of an electronic edition is to present an unmediated version of original source material - an archive. Lavagnino opposes the usefulness of this practice by asserting that oftentimes Renaissance source material needs to be contextualized and edited to be correctly understood, and that the archive only offers "a limited representation of these texts". In order to illustrate this point, Lavagnino takes up two cases studies: the Thomas Middleton edition and the corpus of Renaissance texts from the Women Writers Project (WWP). Lavagnino sums the article by returning to print editions: "[e]ditions have always been powerful tools for shaping the way we see authors and text". This same power, Lavagnino argues, is inherent in digital editions and should be exercised appropriately.

McGann, J. (2006).  From Text to Work: Digital Tools and the Emergence of the Social Text. Text. 16, 49–62.

McGann's primary inquiry is, "where is information technology driving literary and cultural studies and - not least of all - scholarly editing, the foundational discipline of those broad fields of work?" McGann argues that there are two main branches of scholarly editing: facsimile/diplomatic and electric. These are then supplemented with a "third variant, social-text editing, proposed by the late D.F. McKenzie." McGann takes up May's edition of Coleridge as a case study. Despite his praise of Mays' edition, McGann argues that what this publication doesn't do is engage with the social text. Developing a digital component to Mays' work would present users with more critical options and would increase analytic speed. McGann argues that while not many digital projects have successfully realized their full potential, the options facilitated by the digital are immense. While Mays' edition of Coleridge is superb, it only reaches a small and specific community. On the other hand, "[a] well-designed digital user's environment can - and should - expose the dynamic relations that operate in - indeed, that define - such an educational research community."

Price, K. M. (2009).  Edition, Project, Database, Archive, Thematic Research Collection: What's in a Name?. 3,

Price explores how "current terms describing digital scholarship both clarify and obscure our collective enterprise." He takes up five terms - edition, project, database, archive, and thematic research collective - and uses the Walt Whitman Archive as a case study to examine those categories. In many ways, Price argues that the terms of digital textual studies are inadequate. Price the relationship between print and digital editions, the transient notions of a "project," and the movement from archival materials to digital surrogates. Price argues that the term digital thematic research collection may well be a more accurate way to describe the work - like the Walt Whitman Archive - undertaken by digital humanities scholars. Price champions a shift in emphasis from the created object to the group of people creating together.

Tomasi, F. (2013).  Digital editions as a new model of conceptual authority data. {JLIS}.it. 4, 21–44.

Projects relating to the promotion of cultural heritage are facing a gradual transition from the description of the sources, a metadata layer, to their digitization. When this heritage is textual special attention is paid to the digitization annotated as transcription or marked-up, with the goal of textual edition or documentary. Every feature of a document element annotation that can be - and it is therefore an object of interpretation - has the form of an authority data to be analyzed under the different aspects that attest to the specific instance of the element in the context. Instruments of resource description, as a product of the context and domain, help transform the edition of a document in a knowledge base. The Semantic Web and Linked Data provide the theoretical tools and technology to convert authority files, which represent the access points to the conceptual and semantic digital editions, in interoperable resources.

Vanhoutte, E. (2013).  Where is the editor?: Resistance in the creation of an electronic critical edition. Human IT: Journal for Information Technology Studies as a Human Science. 3,

This article begins by Edward Vanhoutte offering an anecdote about his experience at the museum exhibition. Vanhoutte argues that the exhibit offered a freedom of pace and a wealth of information that provided a satisfaction he has never experienced using a schoarlyl edition of a text. Vanhoutte argues that many editions try to fulfill a number of classifications and that this furcation results in a editorial mess. Some of the classifications Vanhoutte identifies are historical-cultural editions, study editions, reading editions, and facsimile editions. Vanhoutte asserts that scholarly editions should focus on preserving and contextualizing the text first and foremost.