Revising the metadata table for better calibration
Name: Sohini Chattopadhyay
Date and Time:
2017.Feb.13, 4:00pm
Location: 112 Street, NY 10025
Subject: New categories
In the previous class, we decided to brainstorm all the problems we faced while working on the metadata table. The issue tracker on github was a useful reminder of our collective efforts at identifying prospective problems and solutions. We then made a consolidated spreadsheet of all our metadata content to compare and contrast, and come up with some standard codes and norms to make the metadata tables consistent to spellings, words and meanings.
Therefore, instead of 'recipes', we decided to use the word 'entries'.
In the metadata table, we decided to include 'materials' instead of 'ingredients', tool, purpose and subject_keyword_activity. We went on to create a new metadata table on the basis of this consensus.
At home, I read the Github folios from 157v to 163v for the spreadsheet to demarcate materials from tools. Earlier, I had clubbed them together as ingredients, but this new classification was more specific as a part of creating something - which is the main essence of the making and knowing project. some of the tools had specific adjectives - for example, a well cleaned anvil (p159r_a4) or a wire brush made from brass (p159v_a1). The good part about this new classification is clearly that it separates tools from materials used in the final product. However, the distinct adjectives for the tools can make them unecessarily abstract. The new section on purpose helped to classify the mode of entry better - as making, advice or application. It still however does not acommodate marginalias. From the facsismile, the marginalias appear to be an integral part of the form of the manuscript. While the metadata captures the content in its abstraction, how do we capture the form of the manuscript in the metadata table? How do we translate the visual representative component of reading a manuscript on to a table where we are essentially noting down raw information and classifying them into our definitions of accepted terms of comprehension?
Name: Sohini Chattopadhyay
Date and Time:
2017.Feb.14, 11:30am
Location: 112 Street, NY 10025
Subject: missing folios, issue tracker, importance of Github
I noticed that a folio was missing from the Github which was present in the PDF. I will raise this on the issue tracker. This however left me with some questions - how much authority do we or should we as individuals have in comparing copies and versions of the folios? How much should we be able to alter the contents, considering each of us are dealing with very specific folios which several other members in the team may not be aware of. This problem however, I realize, is easily resolved if we raise every doubt dutifully on the issue-tracker and take Github very seriously as a collaborative communicative workspace.
Name: Sohini Chattopadhyay
Date and Time:
2017.Feb.14, 3:20pm
Location: 112 Street, NY 10025
Subject: Observations on reverbatory furnace, annotations, on form of making notes for Wikischolar
As I read through the folios again I noticed the recurrent use of the reverbatory furnace in metallurgy related entries. I had worked on a paper last year on the role of reverbatory furnace in disposing human dead bodies in Bombay in the 1880s, and how it was earlier used in metallurgy. In Indian history, the furnace is usually associated with factories. I was intrigued to read about its earlier history in crafts-making. Earlier I had assumed that the reverbatory furnace was more common in the seventeenth century, but this primary source helps me situate it at an earlier date.
I am keen to follow this story in my spare time - since these folios do not have annotation, I wonder if those who are reading the folios for this particular course can also compile small annotations with snippets of information if not a full-fledged paper.
NOTE: On form of working: I decided to write my notes for Wikischolar on Gitbash. I created a text file on a personal local repository in my drive, and I am using the command vim to open the file on the text editor. It appears to be a very useful tool, more so because it is helping me familiarize with the command line.