<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Digitization and Repatriation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/</link>
	<description>Covering the intersection of digital technology and research, teaching, and learning in the humanities, including search, data mining, website development and design, and programming.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 23:12:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alexis Turner: Scratchpad &#187; Which is better - to think about food, or to eat food?</title>
		<link>http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/comment-page-1/#comment-1744</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexis Turner: Scratchpad &#187; Which is better - to think about food, or to eat food?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/#comment-1744</guid>
		<description>[...] any rate, the post in question is on digitization and repatriation. Specifically, he asks if digital objects, photos, etc. are so finely detailed that they convey as [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] any rate, the post in question is on digitization and repatriation. Specifically, he asks if digital objects, photos, etc. are so finely detailed that they convey as [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan Alexander</title>
		<link>http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/comment-page-1/#comment-1348</link>
		<dc:creator>Bryan Alexander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/#comment-1348</guid>
		<description>Good catch, Dan.  I wonder how this connects with Roger Schonfeld&#039;s presentation, which notes that overseas academics cited digital scholarly publications more frequently than did Amerians.

PS: blogged most of CNI at the NITLE blog.  More sessions coming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good catch, Dan.  I wonder how this connects with Roger Schonfeld&#8217;s presentation, which notes that overseas academics cited digital scholarly publications more frequently than did Amerians.</p>
<p>PS: blogged most of CNI at the NITLE blog.  More sessions coming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/comment-page-1/#comment-1339</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:45:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dancohen.org/2007/12/14/digitization-and-repatriation/#comment-1339</guid>
		<description>This reminds me of a question posed in my Museum Informatics class at FSU by professorStu Paul Marty (originally posed by Diane M. Zorich): &quot;Which is more important--the object, or the information ABOUT the object?  What if you could *only* have one or the other--which would you choose?&quot;

My head says that without information about an object--without knowledge of its context--an object is nearly meaningless.  But my heart says there&#039;s something magical about original objects.  But if I HAD to choose, I&#039;d go with the information.

Lynch&#039;s point is a great one--digital surrogates can be so well made now that an object&#039;s physical information is no longer restricted to the physical object itself.  Scholars can now almost have their cake and eat it, too, which is tremendously beneficial.  I do wonder, though, if there would ever be objection on the part of the original institution/nation/source of objects to that sort of detailed digital surrogate--would they claim even that information?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This reminds me of a question posed in my Museum Informatics class at FSU by professorStu Paul Marty (originally posed by Diane M. Zorich): &#8220;Which is more important&#8211;the object, or the information ABOUT the object?  What if you could *only* have one or the other&#8211;which would you choose?&#8221;</p>
<p>My head says that without information about an object&#8211;without knowledge of its context&#8211;an object is nearly meaningless.  But my heart says there&#8217;s something magical about original objects.  But if I HAD to choose, I&#8217;d go with the information.</p>
<p>Lynch&#8217;s point is a great one&#8211;digital surrogates can be so well made now that an object&#8217;s physical information is no longer restricted to the physical object itself.  Scholars can now almost have their cake and eat it, too, which is tremendously beneficial.  I do wonder, though, if there would ever be objection on the part of the original institution/nation/source of objects to that sort of detailed digital surrogate&#8211;would they claim even that information?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
