Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(5)
The whole debate was connected to the need to improve scholars' literacy to participate in digital, networked and open contexts of scholarship (Goodfellow & Lea, 2013; Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2012b).
… Specific methods of digital humanities and the methodological debate (particularly ontological) on the nature of digitalized cultural heritage … Building a professional identity as digital scholars while dealing with digital, networked and open contexts of academic practice (including research and teaching).
For this perspective, in fact, the training focus could be scholars' professional learning and identity change while dealing with digital, networked and open contexts of academic practice (Goodfellow, 2014; Pearce et al., 2010).
To sum up, this research strand focused not only how the scholars behave in the digital, networked and open contexts of practice, but it worked out the tensions and contradictions that lead academics to act creatively to align values and practices within the making of their professional identity.
FAFG works extensively in two types of circumstances: "closed contexts" in which the site and victims of a massacre are known and "open contexts" where, as Peccerelli says, they have remains but not identities.
Similar(54)
The level of service concept illustrated by Open Context may be one such area.
Open Context uses Git and Mantis Bug Tracker to track and correct dataset errors.
Two examples from archaeology, Open Context and the Digital Archaeological Record (tDAR), illustrate the diversity of approaches to data validation.
Open Context provides multiple validation processes that incorporate peer review in a way that goes beyond the simple accept/reject binary.
Whereas Open Context is a boutique publisher, focusing on data presentation and reuse, tDAR is a large repository primarily concerned with with collecting and preserving archaeology data for future use.
For example, Open Context published archaeological data from a site in eastern Turkey at the substantial cost of $10,000 15,0000, but this publication expense was minor compared to $800,000 spent to collect the data.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com