<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Jsmithies on Journal of Digital Humanities</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/jsmithies/</link><description>Recent content in Jsmithies on Journal of Digital Humanities</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/jsmithies/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Evaluating Scholarly Digital Outputs: The Six Layers Approach</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-4/evaluating-scholarly-digital-outputs-by-james-smithies/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-4/evaluating-scholarly-digital-outputs-by-james-smithies/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Developing standards to evaluate scholarly digital output is one of the most significant problems our generation of digital humanists can work on. The improvement of tools and methods, the elaboration of theoretical perspectives, and (above all else) the development of digital outputs, will always be of primary importance. The elaboration of evaluation standards, however, has a broader reach: it is part of our responsibility as good scholarly citizens. Regardless of how digital humanities develops in the next few years humanists are going to need quality standards that help us distinguish ‘good’ from ‘bad’ work. In our universities this is primarily connected with the administrative requirements of performance and tenure review, but it goes much further than that.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>