On 5.16.94 CF said:
>We are in a transition phase from print to electronic
critical editions. IMHO, the _only_ useful product of a paper-based
critical edition--right now--is the electronic text on which it is based.<
 
While I applaud the direction of what he is saying, I think the two sentences
contain a contradiction.  I think we want to help the transition along but
there are at least two costs of forcing usage in only one direction:
        a. the social cost of leaving out people who are underequipped,
either in machinery or training, and
        b. the additional social cost of being seen to be hardnosed and of
forcing technology down people's throats, which tactically can make the
process of the transition more difficult rather than less.
 
The best modes at the moment of helping the transition I think are providing
good examples and providing the right tools.  TEI is well on its way of doing
both.  And CF is basically right that the print tool now becomes a means to
an end, which now ought indeed to be the electronic (and more useful)
version.  --pg
 
Peter Graham   [log in to unmask]   Rutgers University Libraries
169 College Ave., New Brunswick, NJ 08903 (908)932-5908; fax (908)932-5888