(Alternative names for this keyword)
|Related keyword(s)||wikipedia, wiktionary, wikiversity, wikibooks, wikinews, wikiquote, wikimedia commons, wikispecies|
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of keywords|
wikisource is included as keyword or extra keyword in 0 datasets, 0 tools and 5 publications.
There is no datasets for this keyword.
There is no tools for this keyword.
|Title||Author(s)||Published in||Language||DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.||Abstract||R||C|
|A lexicon for processing archaic language: the case of XIXth century Slovene||Tomaž Erjavec
|WoLeR 2011: International Workshop on Lexical Resources||English||2011||The paper presents a lexicon to support computational processing of historical Slovene texts. Historical Slovene texts are being increasingly digitised and made available on the internet but are still underutilised as no language technology support is offered for their processing. Appropriate tools and resources would enable full-text searching with modern-day lemmas, modernisation of archaic language to make it more accessible to today‟s readers, and automatic OCR correction. We discuss the lexicon needed to support tokenisation, modernisation, lemmatisation and part-of-speech tagging of historical texts. The process of lexicon acquisition relies on a proof-read corpus, a large lexicon of contemporary Slovene, and tools to map historical forms to their contemporary equivalents via a set of rewrite rules, and to provide an editing environment for lexicon construction. The lexicon, currently work in progress, will be made publicly available; it should help not only in making digital libraries more accessible but also provide a quantitative basis for linguistic explorations of historical Slovene texts and a prototype electronic dictionary of archaic Slovene.||1||0|
|Rich Texts: Wikisource as an Open Access Repository for Law and the Humanities||Timothy K. Armstrong||University of Cincinnati College of Law Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series||English||15 May 2010||Open access to research and scholarship, although well established in the sciences, remains an emerging phenomenon in the legal academy. In recent years, a number of open access repositories have been created to permit self-archiving of legal scholarship (either within or across institutional boundaries), and faculties at some leading research institutions have adopted policies supporting open access to their work. Although existing repositories for legal scholarship represent a clear improvement over proprietary, subscription-based repositories in some ways, their architecture, and the narrowly defined missions they have elected to pursue, limit their ability to illuminate the ongoing dialogue among texts that is a defining characteristic of scholarly discourse in law and the humanities. One of the wiki-based projects operated by the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation - the Wikisource digital library - improves upon the shortcomings of existing open access repositories by bringing source texts and commentary together in a single place, with additional contextual materials hosted on other Wikimedia Foundation sites just a click away. These features of Wikisource, if more widely adopted, may improve academic discourse by highlighting conceptual interconnections among works, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, and reducing the competitive advantages of proprietary, closed-access legal information services.||3||0|
|Crowdsourcing and Open Access: Collaborative Techniques for Disseminating Legal Materials and Scholarship||Timothy K. Armstrong||Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal||English||2010||This short essay surveys the state of open access to primary legal source materials (statutes, judicial opinions and the like) and legal scholarship. The ongoing digitization phenomenon (illustrated, although by no means typified, by massive scanning endeavors such as the Google Books project and the Library of Congress's efforts to digitize United States historical documents) has made a wealth of information, including legal information, freely available online, and a number of open-access collections of legal source materials have been created. Many of these collections, however, suffer from similar flaws: they devote too much effort to collecting case law rather than other authorities, they overemphasize recent works (especially those originally created in digital form), they do not adequately hyperlink between related documents in the collection, their citator functions are haphazard and rudimentary, and they do not enable easy user authentication against official reference sources. The essay explores whether some of these problems might be alleviated by enlarging the pool of contributors who are working to bring paper records into the digital era. The same "peer production" process that has allowed far-flung communities of volunteers to build large-scale informational goods like the Wikipedia encyclopedia or the Linux operating system might be harnessed to build a digital library. The essay critically reviews two projects that have sought to "crowdsource" proofreading and archiving of texts: Distributed Proofreaders, a project frequently held up as a model in the academic literature on peer production; and Wikisource, a sister site of Wikipedia that improves on Distributed Proofreaders in a number of ways. The essay concludes by offering a few illustrations meant to show the potential for using Wikisource as an open-access repository for primary source materials and scholarship, and considers some possible drawbacks of the crowdsourced approach.||4||1|
|Infrastruktura slovenistične literarne vede||Miran Hladnik||28th Obdobja Symposium: Infrastruktura slovenščine in slovenistike||Slovenian||2009||Slovene literary studies is being rapidly brought up to date through the digitalisation of Slovene literature from its beginnings to the present, the relocation of academic communication, research and teaching work to the Internet, and the digitalisation of past published works on literary studies. The article describes the current situation and takes a look into the future.||1||1|
|Library 2.0 and User-Generated Content: What can the users do for us?||Patrick Danowski||World Library and Information Congress: 73rd IFLA General Conference and Council||English||25 May 2007||Library 2.0 and user-generated content are two terms, which are closely connected. In the presentation, I will briefly define both terms. Two example projects where user- generated content and libraries interact will be presented. The cooperation of Wikipedia and the Personennamendatei, the German cooperative name authority files is the first. The second will be Wikisource where users provide transcribed source material. Another important area of user-generated content is social tagging where users index different resources. And if the users will do so much in the future, is there still a place for librarians? But in the future user and librarians become partners and the library will provide the platform: the library 2.0.||0||0|