Okay, other than a few minor fixes to be done. the projects are ready to be seen by the outside world.
o UMW Images through the Ages – http://projects.umwhistory.org/images/
o Civil War Fredericksburg — http://projects.umwhistory.org/cwh/
o James Monroe Papers — http://projects.umwhistory.org/jmp/
o Life and Legacy of Mary Ball Washington — http://maryballwash.umwblogs.org/
Group contract grade (5% of course grade):
— Based on quality of original proposal and on need to make changes made to proposal since then.
Group Grade (25% of course grade):
— Includes site design, information architecture, accuracy (including citations), content, proofreading, usability, and overall impressions
Individual Grade (25% of course grade):
— Includes criteria from group grade as well as relative effort, working with others, timeliness & accuracy of work done.
…based on the impact of the trend toward the digitization of everything. 😉
Check out this brief piece from the Dec. 2009 Wired on literature and data-mining.
We’re about 2/3 of the way through the semester. In the comments below, each group should list its 2 or 3 biggest issues at this moment in time.
I asked our good friends at DTLT to look into the notion of interactive maps. They suggested the following:
We think that MapLib might be a really good solution for this (http://www.maplib.net/). Essentially, it lets you use the Google Maps user interface (annotating, editing, sharing) on any image.
It looks like you can take the map image created by Dr. Hanna’s class and then tag them and embed them. I suggest you play around a bit with the interface and see if it does what your group is looking to do.
Katelyn reminded me of this video made about the changes on a Wikipedia page about Heavy Metal. It’s worth checking out for a visual representation of the changes that happen over time.
Link to contracts from 2008 class
A familiar scene, with new words: http://bit.ly/99Oeh9