Our discussion focused on three main topics:

1. The question of DHQ's topical heterogeneity

AW noted that he had heard feedback about the new DHQ issue saying that it covered a very broad range of topics/fields; JF noted that DHQ's goal is to help readers find connections between research in different digital humanities fields, and to help authors articulate the broader relevance of their work (beyond the range of their immediate colleagues).

We discussed how DHQ might make these connections and cross-cutting themes more visible:

• possibly by providing broad thematic keywording as well as specifically topical keywording
• by the use of exploratory tools such as TaPORware?
• by introducing user-supplied tags (and encouraging users to tag not simply topics but broad themes)

2. How to get people from the book history field interested in digital humanities (and in reading/writing for DHQ)

We discussed the possibility of a special issue or article cluster on this topic; AW will contact Mats Dahlstrom and raise the possibility.

3. Increase editorial access to submissions as they are reviewed

We discussed ways of making it easier for DHQ editors to read and comment on submitted materials. A possible process we should try:

• Make submissions visible via a wiki page (easier to maintain) that is open only to the DHQ editors
• Solicit comments from the editors while the articles are being reviewed
• Include editorial comments as well as review comments in feedback to the author

JF will discuss the logistics of maintaining such a page with Melanie, and will set up a page for this purpose. Eventually this process should be incorporated into a more formal workflow management system, when we have one.

-- JuliaFlanders - 11 Jul 2008