Continue reading »]]>

In at least two fields that I know of, practitioners make conscious use of documented patterns. You can’t swing a chicken without hitting them in the software and web development worlds, from the Gang of Four book to Yahoo’s design pattern library, perhaps throwing Twitter Bootstrap into the mix. Architecture holds a place as the development of the first pattern language I know of, Christopher Alexander’s “A Pattern Language”, but maybe there are earlier antecedents.

What would it mean to create a bootstrapping set of patterns for DH projects? Miriam Posner wrote a moderately high-level version of one, as did Paige C. Morgan. How can we build on or further atomize these beginnings? Certainly, I’m not talking about prescribing all the steps of a project, but Alexander never claimed that houses should all be cookie-cutter either. I assert, though, that a set of patterns could help new entrants to DH make early projects, could help with prototyping more ambitious projects, and could raise the bar in general. I’m optimistic enough about our abilities that I think we can describe patterns at different scales than Morgan and Posner, but also optimistic about humanities scholarship that we will always be undertaking projects that are beyond simple patterns.

Continue reading »]]>

So we can store everything in digital form now. Except when we can’t, when it’s something ephemeral that didn’t get persisted when it occurred. Except that maybe we can? I’d like to talk about the frontiers of digital recreations of irreproducible historical phenomena, like sound before recordings, not to mention things like smell, taste, and touch. This last might be having its dawn with 3D printing, and it seems there are explorations of how to work with sound: Niall Atkinson & my colleague Peter Leonard’s work with the bells of Renaissance Florence comes to mind, as does the researcher who made a stab at speaking Indo-European, and perhaps the HIPSTAS work could be turned to these ends.