The born-digital in future digital scholarly editing and publishing

Scholarly editions are crucial for accessing primary cultural sources, providing trustworthy interpretations guided by experts. The traditional understanding of a "critical" edition, focused on textual authority and correcting errors, is evolving to encompass "enriched" editions, including contextual information and annotations. While central to literary studies, the concept of an "edition" is debated among historians, who might prefer terms like "facsimile" or "database" for digital collections of historical records. This paper clarifies that "edition" here refers to a text selected, altered, and/or annotated to provide an authoritative representation. Digital scholarly editing leverages computers' affordances, building on established scholarly practices while embracing digital possibilities. However, merely digitizing existing print materials isn't sufficient; true digital editions necessitate a digital paradigm in their theory, method, and practice. The paper examines the challenges of adapting digital scholarly editing to encompass the "born-digital," i.e., materials inherently created and consumed digitally, and explores how the field needs to evolve to meet these challenges.

Peter Robinson's six propositions for critical digital editions highlight the continuity with traditional editing, emphasizing historical analysis, hypotheses about creation and change, detailed records, the presentation of an edited text alongside other versions, tools for reader hypothesis development, and enriched reading experiences. However, simply digitizing a printed text isn't a digital edition; true digital editions use digital technology and media in ways that cannot be replicated in print. Discussions regarding the definitions of "digital" versus "digitized" editions highlight the importance of distinguishing between the process and the output. While modern printed editions use digital tools, digital editing can result in either printed or online editions. Only Robinson's proposition about reader hypothesis development appears uniquely digital. Jerome McGann's work emphasized the social context of texts, including their production, reception, and mutation, which has influenced how editors now treat texts and how digital editions should adapt to modern forms of cultural production.

The paper uses a primarily discursive methodology, analyzing existing literature and case studies in digital scholarly editing and publishing. It examines the limitations of current practices in adapting to born-digital materials such as social media content, digital fiction, and video games. The authors discuss the challenges posed by the volume, variety, and velocity of born-digital content and the need for reliable conduits to convey the value and veracity of these sources. Case studies like the Digital Fiction Curios project, a 3D virtual reality museum showcasing electronic literature, and the Pathfinders project, which documents early hypertext literature through video recordings, illustrate the potential and limitations of different approaches. The paper critically examines the role of established standards like TEI XML and the implications of their book-oriented structure in relation to born-digital materials. It also explores the historical influence of CD-ROM editions and their "electronic book" model, which continues to shape current digital editions. The discussion analyzes the tension between maintaining established practices and adopting new paradigms suited to the complexities of born-digital content and the influence of digital publishing formats on digital editions.

The paper's central argument is that current digital scholarly editing practices are insufficient to address the challenges posed by born-digital materials. The current state-of-the-art largely focuses on digitizing print sources, failing to fully embrace the unique characteristics of born-digital content. The limitations of existing standards, such as TEI XML, in accommodating the scale, interactivity, and dynamism of born-digital materials are highlighted. The need for reproducible systems and practices is emphasized, balancing established scholarly principles with the affordances of digital technology. Case studies (Digital Fiction Curios and Pathfinders) reveal both innovative yet not easily reproducible approaches and more sustainable, replicable models. The paper underscores the importance of acknowledging that perfect replication of born-digital environments is often impossible and embracing a degree of information loss. It critiques the tendency for digital editions to mimic their print counterparts, advocating for the development of new paradigms for presenting and navigating born-digital content. The limitations of existing digital publishing platforms are discussed, urging a greater integration of publishing considerations within the editorial process to create sustainable, accessible digital editions. The paper emphasizes the need to consider the reader's perspective in developing future frameworks, potentially extending TEI standards while moving beyond book-oriented paradigms. The issue of how best to capture non-linear narratives, platform-specific features, and the challenges of intellectual property and accessibility are extensively explored.

The findings highlight the need for a paradigm shift in digital scholarly editing to effectively address the challenges of born-digital materials. The continued dominance of print editions and the tendency for digital editions to mimic print suggest either a reader preference for familiar formats or the intrinsic suitability of book-oriented structures for presenting certain types of evidence. The paper challenges the assumption that a book-like format is always the most appropriate for born-digital materials, suggesting that alternative models might be needed. The historical context of digital publishing, from CD-ROMs to web-based platforms, reveals the influence of technological and economic factors on the design and functionality of digital editions. The paper advocates for a more nuanced understanding of how these factors shape the editorial process and the reader experience. The discussion underscores the limitations of the "DIY" approach prevalent in digital humanities and the need for sustainable, standardized platforms for creating and publishing digital editions.

This paper argues for a significant evolution in digital scholarly editing and publishing to accommodate the increasingly digital nature of cultural production and consumption. While respecting the rich legacy of traditional scholarly editing, the paper stresses the necessity of developing new paradigms for creating and presenting born-digital materials. Future frameworks should extend existing standards while moving beyond book-oriented approaches, considering reader needs and the unique complexities of various platforms. This involves addressing challenges related to scale, reproducibility, preservation, and accessibility in the context of born-digital materials. Greater collaboration between editors and publishers, along with the development of sustainable digital publishing platforms, are essential for ensuring the long-term preservation and accessibility of our cultural heritage in its increasingly digital form.

The paper focuses primarily on a theoretical discussion, analyzing existing literature and case studies rather than conducting empirical research. While it examines specific examples of digital editions, it does not provide an exhaustive survey of all existing approaches. The paper's recommendations for future practice are largely speculative, based on current trends and technological possibilities. Further research is needed to explore the effectiveness of different approaches to digital scholarly editing for born-digital materials, focusing on user experience and the impact of different formats on scholarly understanding.