curateteaching / digitalpedagogy Goto Github PK

My understanding is that editorial review will take place after peer review, and that the imminent step is "draft version undergoing peer-to-peer review." I'd recommend switching the order of these two intermediate steps, and highlighting the peer review step. If I'm in error about this, though, feel free to close this issue.

The description includes a list of the publication's Advisory Board:

https://github.com/curateteaching/digitalpedagogy/blob/master/description.md#advisory-board

Could you provide a sentence or two above that list that describes the role of the board in this project?

GitHub-flavored markdown recognizes bulleted lists if they don't have leading linebreaks, but Pandoc markdown and vanilla markdown don't, resulting in paragraphs like this one:

I'll add a fix for this to my existing PR.

If you look at the screenshot for the Praxis keyword artifact "How did they make that?" (right click on the image and choose "View Image" or "Open image in new tab"), you'll see that it appears to be a screenshot of a screenshot--the page itself has a drop shadow around it, and a white border surrounds that shadow. This looks fine against a white background, and with undecorated images, but if we were to change the page background color at any point in this volume's development, or decide to apply drop shadows to the images, this particular image will start to look very strange, since it will have a drop shadow applied to the drop shadow, or it will suddenly appear to have a large white border around an inner drop shadow. Here's an exaggerated example of the double drop-shadow effect:

An easy solution to this would be to crop the image.

• Somehow links to Shawn Graham's site (http://electricarchaeology.ca/) aren't in the current version of the file.
• Shawn Graham's affiliation (Carleton University) isn't in the current version.
• Ron Brooks affiliation (Oklahoma State University) isn't in the current version
• Quinn Warnick's affiliation doesn't appear after his item in the list of curated artifacts.

Link to Jesse's blog is not external. I'm leaving an issue!

d.

This is likely partially attributable to using Pandoc markdown instead of GitHub-flavored markdown. It seems that even numbers of hyphens, like ---- (four hyphens), are converted into em-dashes, but odd numbers, like ----- (five hyphens), are converted into an em-dash followed by a hyphen. In other places, en-dashes appear.

Although this may be a matter better suited for Editorial, I'm logging this here since it'll be an easy matter for a global buffer find and replace operation in Vim, and provided we agree it's an issue for this phase, it's a matter I easily can fix in my next PR.

The link to the "Digital Research Tools Wiki," has, according to the site it links to, "been superseded by Bamboo DiRT." I'd recommend updating this link to http://dirtdirectory.org/.

(As an aside, I don't fully understand how the DiRT directory is necessarily pedagogical in nature, i.e. that it "point[s] to a widespread emerging interest in digital pedagogy within digital humanities," but that's a matter for a peer comment, and not a bug report.)

In Interface.md, the link listed for "New Undergraduate Pedagogical Partnerships for Large Archival Project," https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10152947852203646&id=317355293645, links to a Facebook post instead of a page at MoEML. I assume that's not the desired target, especially since the link on the Facebook post points to a dead MoEML page that reads "MoEML has not yet added content for this page."

I'm guessing the correct page is for the MoEML Pedagogical Partnership is http://mapoflondon.uvic.ca/pedagogical_partnership.htm.

I also noticed that the screenshot for this pedagogical partnership appears to be a screenshot of a Facebook post of a Washington College press release describing Washington College's partnership with MoEML. Perhaps the screenshot should instead be an image of the project page itself? At the very least, it could be a screenshot of the original press release, which is here: http://www.washcoll.edu/live/news/6201-washington-college-to-help-bring-renaissance.

This issue also applies to the link as reproduced in the Works Cited section.

There appear to be two links in the rhetoric keyword that return 404s:

• Guide to Teaching Visual Rhetoric: http://viz.cwrl.utexas.edu/node/411 at accac50#diff-7246768f65cd72d414672f933e269605L109
• Assignment: Narrative Title Sequence: http://www.d.umn.edu/~cstroupe/f11/4260/narrative\_title/narrative\_title\_sequence.html at accac50#diff-7246768f65cd72d414672f933e269605L127

This is for Jonathan: a curator has requested that each entry have a "how to cite this entry" since we're doing something new and especially because each entry is in various states of review. We were going to come up with a way to do this. But, is there an MLA standard for versioning in citations?

By default, in Pandoc markdown image markup like this:

![screenshot](path/to/image.jpg)

the caption screenshot is rendered as text below the image:

Most image captions are screenshot, but some are screen shot, and others are more descriptive, like Screenshot: Gideon Burton's Silva Rhetoricae. Of these, the latter format is probably the best.

We could easily fix this issue by simply hiding this text altogether in CSS, but at the very least, these captions should probably be alt or title attributes, so that they can be viewable as tooltips and speakable from screen readers. I'd recommend editing these captions so that they're more descriptive.

The Google Books URL in Praxis, http://books.google.com/books?id=VWzgtZMJCwgC&lpg=PP1&dq=better%20pencil&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q=modeling%20clay&f=false, since it includes the query string &q=modeling%20clay, takes you to a search results page:

Editing this URL to http://books.google.com/books?id=VWzgtZMJCwgC&pg=PA74, so that the query string includes only the ID and the page, fixes the issue:

I'll submit this fix in my next PR.

Hi folks! Really excited by your project. I'm sure you've probably already caught this, but just in case - the piece of mine you cite here as forthcoming is also in your failure section in its published version.

Cheers!

As @kshkim noted, there may be a potential permissions concern with redistributing the Fyfe PDF at https://github.com/curateteaching/digitalpedagogy/blob/master/keywords/files/interface%20Paul-Fyfe-Not-Read.pdf, linked at 3fdc66e#diff-647463ac6518b2f534dccad5c53d0a20L63. The text at the bottom of the PDF reads:

Copyright of Journal of Victorian Culture is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

I'm no expert about copyright, however, so @kshkim or @kfitz, feel free to chime in here.

What should the URL slug be?

digitalpedagogy.commons.mla.org?
digiped.commons.mla.org?
______.commons.mla.org?

See, for instance, the double quotation marks around the first two artifacts in the praxis keyword--the first are curly, and the second are straight.

As @kshkim suggested, there may be a copyright concern if a copy of "Writing on Clay" is redistributed, as is hinted at in 2dedf1f#diff-49976e81dcc2ef5deee696717f129f3dR137. If this is not the case, feel free to close this issue as invalid.

Hi folks,

I goofed the image links in my markdown; I originally had a folder called 'imgs' rather than 'images'. I'll fix that.