Jump to content

Centralised RTI bibliographic solution?


Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi Kathryn,

While it would be great to have a master point of access to the literature my thinking is that at this point the more duplication the better because the creation and maintenance of these types of documents are learning experiences and the more people we involve in maintaining them the more likely there will develop a sense of ownership of documents like bibliographies and with the rapidly growing literature.

As fields like conservation or archaeology encounter new technologies I think we need 'street-level' ownership of evolving documents like bibliographies. I know this appears to challenge the 'master-student' model of science education where high standards are maintained by a centralized authority. But new technologies are coming at our fields faster than that model can accommodate, so I'm looking to a 'wikipedic' model. I look forward to looking to RTISAD, CHI, Mendeley, RTI_help and I hope other resources in the future. We must arbitrarily decide how far afield to go (pure RTI applications) in creating bibliographies so there is almost always the potential for new info in different biblios.

Speaking of Mendeley- I've joined up to learn what it's about and been left scratching my head! I feel I've exchanged the familiar bibliographic interface for a digital catalog interface and gained a group of unknown but apparently like-minded academics from unexpected fields! It is a lot to take in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

I think a centralized place that folks can both use and contribute to is extremely valuable! I think having one we promote from this community is useful and people will appreciate it. Of course, if folks want to do their own thing they can, and people will, no matter what. However, many folks including me, are extremely appreciative of having a centralized place to turn, and not having to reinvent the wheel. No list will be perfect, but having a solid place to start is extremely helpful!


I personally haven't used Mendelay so can't say whether it's the right solution. I'd love to hear others opinions about that. The little bit I know seems promising, and I will try to find a bit of time to check out the list Kathryn and Hembo created.


I'll add that this is a great question, and exactly the kind of discussion we want to spark and promote on this newly forming forum.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for Dennis and Carla for their replies to this thread.


As a fundamental component of any research community, my vote would be for a centralised bibliographic resource. Anything to avoid having to check in multiple locations. The list on RTI_help has really grown - excellent. :)


I've been away from the RTI community for a couple of months, but am starting to get back into it with my current H-RTI fieldwork here in Aswan and the start of my fellowship at Freie University in Berlin in a couple of weeks (H-RTI on early writing in Egypt and the Near East from perspective of materials, tools and scribal techniques). Looking forward to contributing more actively to content and discussions.


Best - Kathryn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I may be out of step here (marching to a different drummer, dancing to a different beat, swimming in the wrong school?). But I see web-based resources as processes more than products. Unlike printed bibliographies they go off, become moribund, very quickly. To me a good web-based biblio will take advantage of that venue's connectivity and maintain active links to official sources as well as gray lit. resources such as author's copies. If links to full text are not freely allowed the biblio should link to an abstract. This kind of updating is separate from keeping the actual citations current.


Wherever the central biblio is located it's best that it be collaboratively maintained to assure that the links are kept current. For example after being away from it for a year I just looked at the RTI_help bibliography (public version) and many website links need to be redirected. They now return '404s', 'Page Not Found' after only one year! It is still usable as an old-school dated bibliography (2011 is the latest citation year), but to me that's not enough for a web-based 'product'. RTI users need all the connectivity they can get. This forum demonstrates that every week!


Mendeley is a powerful resource, much more than a biblio tool, and I think the RTI bibliography, (search for the Mendeley Group titled 'RTI'), that Hembo started should be maintained as a central go-to resource. (If you are a member of Mendeley you should also look at this link to the Group titled 'Conservation Science and Imaging'. It's another biblio that references RTI.)


But I also think a resource that is less structured, e.g., one that allows links to author's versions, is also helpful. For me a problem more vexing than centralization or authority is how to make sure the resource is actively maintained with all the connectivity possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...