<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Ssinclair on Journal of Digital Humanities</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/ssinclair/</link><description>Recent content in Ssinclair on Journal of Digital Humanities</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/ssinclair/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Text Mining Tools in the Humanities: An Analysis Framework</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/text-mining-tools-in-the-humanities-an-analysis-framework/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/text-mining-tools-in-the-humanities-an-analysis-framework/</guid><description>&lt;h3 id="poster"&gt;Poster&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;iframe class="gde-frame" scrolling="no" src="https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournalofdigitalhumanities.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F12%2FTextMiningToolAnalysisFramework-DH2013-DRAFT3.pdf&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;embedded=true" style="width:100%; height:500px; border: none;"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/TextMiningToolAnalysisFramework-DH2013-DRAFT3.pdf"&gt;Download (PDF, 3.56MB)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 id="abstract"&gt;Abstract&lt;sup id="fnref:1"&gt;&lt;a href="#fn:1" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref"&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most extensive compendium of text mining tools to date includes 71 tools and summarizes each based on ten criteria.&lt;sup id="fnref:2"&gt;&lt;a href="#fn:2" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref"&gt;2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; While extensive, this listing of tools and their properties is general in its review criteria and does not offer any testing-based observations to help users assess actual usability. Humanists looking to try text analysis, visualization, and mining tools for research need better information that is relevant to their needs and reviews of tools that help them make choices. This poster presents the testing framework developed for the TAPoR 2.0 portal reviews. The poster will cover:&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Voyant Notebooks: Literate Programming and Programming Literacy</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/voyant-notebooks-literate-programming-and-programming-literacy/</link><pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/2-3/voyant-notebooks-literate-programming-and-programming-literacy/</guid><description>&lt;h3 id="poster"&gt;Poster&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;iframe class="gde-frame" scrolling="no" src="https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjournalofdigitalhumanities.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F11%2FVoyant-Notebooks-Sinclair-and-Rockwell.pdf&amp;amp;hl=en_US&amp;amp;embedded=true" style="width:100%; height:500px; border: none;"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Voyant-Notebooks-Sinclair-and-Rockwell.pdf"&gt;Download (PDF, 676KB)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3 id="abstract"&gt;Abstract&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some thirty years ago Donald Knuth, a computer scientist, proposed literate programming as a better way of organizing narrative and code (1984). Knuth argued that more emphasis should be placed on explaining to humans what computers are meant to do, rather than simply instructing computers what to do. Knuth was especially interested in weaving together macrostyle code snippets with prose that provided a larger narrative context, not merely functional comments of specific lines of code that are the distilled remnants of an intellectual process.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>