[iDC] shelf life

[Simon Biggs]

Not quite sure what point you are making here. I was just observing that the
AHRC has dropped the requirement to lodge material with AHDS and also
streamlined the submission process. In doing that they have still retained a
requirement that if you have an electronic output of a certain complexity
(eg: an interactive database) then they wish to see evidence of how you
propose to create and maintain that. If your database is not interactive
then they do not have that requirement. I have scratched my head over that
one a little...it is very easy to save yourself a lot of trouble and have a
simple html driven front end to a database instead of something using php or
java. Voila, a lot less bureaucracy!

As for public money, it is welcome so long as the strings attached do not
function to compromise what you want to do with it. I apply for (and
sometimes get) research council funds. However, sometimes I don't apply for
support for a project as I can see it would become overly complicated or
constrained if funded. Better then to just do it and find other means to
finance it. Being both an artist and an academic you can play it both ways
(although I have never felt to be an academic, having spent only a fraction
of my career in education).

By the way, I love computing!

Regards

Simon


On 17/11/07 13:02, "Craig Bellamy" <txt at craigbellamy.net> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
> 
> You make a strange and rather reductive argument that appears to be
> based on a one page form. Up to 50% of all research output in the
> humanities in the UK has some form of digital output. This has very
> little to do with a one-page form nor the AHDS.  And it isn't a matter
> of incorporating 'electronic resources' into research. In most cases, it
> is research in itself. Sure we don't like Bureaucracy and the other
> burdens of modernity (like computing itself); but I am sure you wouldn't
> hesitate in taking public money (obligation free of course).
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simon Biggs wrote:
>> The case of the AHDS is a good one to illustrate this discussion. The AHDS
>> was successful in part due to the Art and Humantities Research Council
>> requiring that all electronic resources associated with the outcomes of
>> research it supported was lodged with the AHDS. This also involved
>> completing a fiddly form as part of the funding application in the first
>> place. Many people simply chose to not have an electronic outcome of the
>> research so as to avoid this extra layer of bureaucracy in the funding
>> submission and project management process.
>> 
>> Now that the AHRC has suspended the requirement for such material to be
>> lodged with the AHDS we might see many more people incorporating electronic
>> resources into their research outcomes. This is ironic, as it would seem the
>> obligation to archive functioned to deter people producing anything to be
>> archived.
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>>   
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity
> (distributedcreativity.org)
> iDC at mailman.thing.net
> https://mailman.thing.net/mailman/listinfo/idc
> 
> List Archive:
> http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/
> 
> iDC Photo Stream:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/idcnetwork/
> 
> RSS feed:
> http://rss.gmane.org/gmane.culture.media.idc
> 
> iDC Chat on Facebook:
> http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2457237647
> 
> Share relevant URLs on Del.icio.us by adding the tag iDCref



Simon Biggs
simon at littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk

Research Professor in Art, Edinburgh College of Art
s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
http://www.eca.ac.uk/