Tara Andrews, The Third Way

Paragraph "Digital editions and digital philology" has a very lucid comparation of pre-digital and fully digital methods in scholarly editing, beyond the "old" and "new philology" distinction. There's no formalization in our SDEs today, and no agreement on what a SDE should be. There's too much customization (I don't agree) that impedes interoperability (I agree on this: to me, customization is necessary, although it impedes interoperability). The rest of the paragraph describes the current pre-digital workflow, and effectively outlines the ways and the advantages of a truly digital workflow for a fully digital SDE (transcription, collation, anaysis, edition, publication). The other paragraph "Digital philology and its impact on stemmatology" argues that stemmatology is the true innovation and advantage/strength of digital philology, but it must be re-founded: in the digital age, it's not true that some variants that are more relationship-revealing than others; instead, computational statistical analysis of huge amounts of data on textual traditions in the future may help us find patterns for stemma-construction that take into account even the commas.

Paolo Monella Curriculum
DH bibliography
Paolo Monella home page