Text, Markup and Apocalypse

So. Text encoding and mark up, eh? How about that.


I'd be lying if I said I knew wtf the readings were about this week. A basic introduction to what text encoding actually is would have been nice. I think I've managed to catch the basic gist of the intent behind most of the chapters. I mean, I can grasp semiotics, with things like symantics and pragmatics. But ... well I don't think I grasped one thing that McGann was saying. As far I'm concerned nothing at all was said. Maybe I was just in a poor mindset at the time. But, I dont think so. I somehow don't think I'm alone on this one.

To be perfectly honest, I have not given text a whole lot of thought in and of itself. In my mind it's always been how we convey information to each other. I've never really thought of the structure itself as being all that important. Rather it's simply been the current vehicle we use to convey ourselves and our ideas, so I s'pose in that respect I have thought of it as a medium.

But I didn't realize there was this much going on with regards to it.

Some of the important things to note and consider that I drew from the readings

The good:

Access and openness, first and foremost. Even if some (Hockey) might disagree with the importance or interest of this aspect.

Fluidity - You can play with digital forms more easily. There is an ability to manipulate that comes with digitizing. And like someone tinkering with an engine by dismantling it we may find new and interesting aspects of text and works that were before unseen.

Searchability and cross referencing


The bad & dangerous

Fluidity - There is more potential for manipulation. Whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Corruption - perhaps things such as structure have been lost in the digitization and markup of a poem. This radically corrupts the intended meaning. Seems to me this can happen we are all just human after all.

Access - Knowledge is power. There is money in knowledge and money goes hand in hand with power. While it is cynical and perhaps unlikely, the monopolization of all things digital IS a potential. This is something that should be monitored and kept as open as possible.

Restrictive - By the same token that it allows for more tinkering there is also the risk of restricting ourselves. While projects like TEI trying to create a universally accepted method for encoding and markup is not necessarily a BAD thing it IS dangerous... In the years to come we may find that the structures we imposed in order to aid us and create a broader cohesiveness have actually hindered other possible outcomes.

I might sound overly cynical and pessimistic here but that is not my intention. These are good things. But caught up in our optimism and excitement for new potentials we must also keep in mind that there is also the potential for things to go astray in unexpected ways. The road to hell is paved with good intentions after all! We might find out that we have set up blocks and handicaps that stunted the growth of the field. It's best to look for these gaps before they fester into a bigger problem and something has to be amputated.

I hope at least a portion of this has made sense and been relevant. Or at least gotten someone thinking. I won't be surprised if that's not the case however and I'm sure I'll have to revise this post when I'm feeling a little fresher.