LOC Workshop on Etexts | Page 8

or rare printed matter,
bound materials, etc. Text posed the greatest conversion challenge of
all. Thus, the genesis of the Workshop, which reflects the problems
faced by AM. These problems include physical problems. For example,
those in the library and archive business deal with collections made up
of fragile and rare manuscript items, bound materials, especially the
notoriously brittle bound materials of the late nineteenth century. These
are precious cultural artifacts, however, as well as interesting sources of
information, and LC desires to retain and conserve them. AM needs to
handle things without damaging them. Guillotining a book to run it
through a sheet feeder must be avoided at all costs.
Beyond physical problems, issues pertaining to quality arose. For
example, the desire to provide users with a searchable text is affected
by the question of acceptable level of accuracy. One hundred percent
accuracy is tremendously expensive. On the other hand, the output of
optical character recognition (OCR) can be tremendously inaccurate.
Although AM has attempted to find a middle ground, uncertainty
persists as to whether or not it has discovered the right solution.
Questions of quality arose concerning images as well.
FLEISCHHAUER contrasted the extremely high level of quality of the
digital images in the Cornell Xerox Project with AM's efforts to
provide a browse-quality or access-quality image, as opposed to an
archival or preservation image. FLEISCHHAUER therefore welcomed
the opportunity to compare notes.
FLEISCHHAUER observed in passing that conversations he had had
about networks have begun to signal that for various forms of media a
determination may be made that there is a browse-quality item, or a
distribution-and-access-quality item that may coexist in some systems
with a higher quality archival item that would be inconvenient to send
through the network because of its size. FLEISCHHAUER referred, of
course, to images more than to searchable text.

As AM considered those questions, several conceptual issues arose:
ought AM occasionally to reproduce materials entirely through an
image set, at other times, entirely through a text set, and in some cases,
a mix? There probably would be times when the historical authenticity
of an artifact would require that its image be used. An image might be
desirable as a recourse for users if one could not provide 100-percent
accurate text. Again, AM wondered, as a practical matter, if a
distinction could be drawn between rare printed matter that might exist
in multiple collections--that is, in ten or fifteen libraries. In such cases,
the need for perfect reproduction would be less than for unique items.
Implicit in his remarks, FLEISCHHAUER conceded, was the
admission that AM has been tilting strongly towards quantity and
drawing back a little from perfect quality. That is, it seemed to AM that
society would be better served if more things were distributed by
LC--even if they were not quite perfect--than if fewer things, perfectly
represented, were distributed. This was stated as a proposition to be
tested, with responses to be gathered from users.
In thinking about issues related to reproduction of materials and seeing
other people engaged in parallel activities, AM deemed it useful to
convene a conference. Hence, the Workshop. FLEISCHHAUER
thereupon surveyed the several groups represented: 1) the world of
images (image users and image makers); 2) the world of text and
scholarship and, within this group, those concerned with
language--FLEISCHHAUER confessed to finding delightful irony in
the fact that some of the most advanced thinkers on computerized texts
are those dealing with ancient Greek and Roman materials; 3) the
network world; and 4) the general world of library science, which
includes people interested in preservation and cataloging.
FLEISCHHAUER concluded his remarks with special thanks to the
David and Lucile Packard Foundation for its support of the meeting,
the American Memory group, the Office for Scholarly Programs, the
National Demonstration Lab, and the Office of Special Events. He
expressed the hope that David Woodley Packard might be able to
attend, noting that Packard's work and the work of the foundation had
sponsored a number of projects in the text area.
******
SESSION I. CONTENT IN A NEW FORM: WHO WILL USE IT

AND WHAT WILL THEY DO?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++ DALY * Acknowledgements * A new
Latin authors disk * Effects of the new technology on previous
methods of research *
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++
Serving as moderator, James DALY acknowledged the generosity of all
the presenters for giving of their time, counsel, and patience in
planning the Workshop, as well as of members of the American
Memory project and other Library of Congress staff, and the David and
Lucile Packard Foundation and its executive director, Colburn S.
Wilbur.
DALY then recounted his visit in March to the Center for Electronic
Texts in the Humanities (CETH) and the Department of Classics at
Rutgers University, where an old friend, Lowell Edmunds, introduced
him to