|

All Comments

Comments on the Pages

  • Towards a Peer Review of GeoHumanities Projects (32 comments)

    • Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop]: What is the intended audience for this project?

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop – Matthew Lincoln] Should the reviewer be asked to specify their perspective and expertise – what aspects of the project are they capable of commenting on?

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop – Kathy Weimer] Guides from Kenneth Field could be helpful: http://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0911/making-a-map-meaningful.html and Diane Stinton: http://t.co/s1bwo0kObZ

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop – Karl Grossner]: do we really want to retain these questions about hosting?

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop] Is the term data provenance clear to all? what about data sources? manipulation of other data?

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop] New Question: Does the documentation provide a background to inform the reader/reviewer to understand the contribution?

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop] The term geospatial is repeated over and over here and yet this is only one segment of geohumanities work.

      Comment by djwrisley on August 26th, 2015

      [from workshop] New Question: should dates of different versions be included/described?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [Anon from Workshop] 1.     Need a statement about how/when the project will end.

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from workshop] Should the reviewer be asked to specify their expertise?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [Anon from workshop] Could the GeoHumanities SIG provide a badge system (like NINES and MESA)?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [Anon from workshop] 1.     Who is the audience for the review?  That is, the audience should be defined and stated prior to the review request. 

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [From poster session] 1.     Are reused data appropriately cited?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] Do the date match the historicity of the map (temporal aspect)!!!

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [From workshop] New Question: 1.     How is this generalizable to other types of DH projects?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from workshop] New Question:1.     How do we make our digital products fit with the traditional publishing models? e.g. Can my map become a peer reviewed journal article?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from workshop] New Question: 1.     Would this help the non(mapping) expert understand the value of mapping in projects?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from workshop] New Question: Incompleteness – is it included?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: 1.     How do maps communicate to different ways of knowing/knowledge? e.g. indigenous methods of knowledge are different from Western knowledge, that is  not written.

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: Does the project address the question of granularity?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: 1.     Communicate the complexity of date (temporal aspects)? 

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: 1.     What do I present a T&P committee?  Why write up a project?

      Comment by djwrisley on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] Does the site have a colophon describing the technologies? Have you credited the technologists?

      Comment by djwrisley on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session]  New Question: Are the manipulations of other’s data explained?

      Comment by djwrisley on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: Where on the continuum of geohumanities does the project fall?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: Does the work produce new artifacts for the community?  (ex. geo-referenced TIFFs that others could use & adapt)?

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 5th, 2015

      [from poster session] New Question: What about methodology sections in our writing?

      Comment by Rachel Murphy on September 7th, 2015

      Is the rationale for choice of software included in project documentation?

      Comment by Rachel Murphy on September 7th, 2015

      And audience(s)?

      Comment by Rachel Murphy on September 7th, 2015

      Is there any information relating to licensing/ future usage of elements of the project (e.g. creative commons licence), and citation?

      Comment by Rachel Murphy on September 7th, 2015

      While this section is not meant to be narrow and about interface design, I do think there is room  to ask whether adequate documentation about interface design/methodology has been included.

      Comment by Kathy Weimer on September 24th, 2015

      Is the reasoning behind the selection of a particular gazetteer or data source described?

Comments on the Blog

  • Hello world! (1 comment)

    • Comment by Mr WordPress on August 26th, 2015

      Hi, this is a comment.
      To delete a comment, just log in and view the post's comments. There you will have the option to edit or delete them.

Source: http://geohum.djwrisley.com/index.php/all-comments/