1991:2 - Universitetet i Bergen

The TE1 has now cornpleted three years of i& projected four-year
developrnent work. The first draft version of the TEI guidelines was
made avaiIab1e in summer 1990 and the final version will be available
in summer 1992. There is still some way to ga for the provision of
adequatc software for handling SGML-encodcd text on the rnachines
which humanities scholars normall y uce (PCs and Macintoshes), bul the
acceptance of the TET'S guidelines by the academic community will be
largely duc to the fact that SGML cornes nearer than my other encoding
scheme to solving Lhe intelfcctual probIcrns posed by cornplex schcilarIy
texts. Since it provides a means of describing the text, SGIVn, also
aIlowc the scholar 10 delet unril later the definition or rclationships
bctwecn eIements in the data and also the selection of my particular
application program An SGML encoded text can bc converted lo n
hypertext, or a daubase or any othes format, bul it is much less easy
to move from another format. to SGML.
9. COPYRIGHT ISSUES AND MACHINE-READABLE DATA
Most schelars cmbarking on a computer-based project in literature will
come up against copyrighl issues concerning machine-readable texts,
parBcuIarly now that pubIishers are entering the market w ilh electronic
texts. Up til1 naw the distribution of eIecwonic texLs has operaled in
a rathcr 'ad hoc' anarchic fashion. Various organizarions Iike the Oxford
Text Archive have set up repositories of machine-readable texts, the
aim being to try to ensure that Lhe labour of preparing a rnachine-teadable
text is not duplicated. The copyright status of many tcxtc in machinereadable
form is unclear. Publishers aeed to prolec~ [tieir inlerests, yet
many scholars feel that software and dala on diskette is expensive to
buy, but very cheap and easy to copy. The problem is compounded by
the fact that the law is dirfereni in different countrfcs, ycl it is so
=sy ro transfer tcxts all ovcr the world via networks.
Therc is als0 a marked reluctrince on the part of scholars to ask ror
copyright pcrmission to enker a tcxt, either because they believe they
will not get pennission, or because thcy do not want to gel involved
in legal issues, or because Ihey have heatd from another source that
permission may not bi: gran~cd. The resuIr of this is oficn le cnicr an
cdition which is out af copyright and which øay not have scholarly
authority, thus giving rise to inferior work. I believe that tcxi analysis
cornputing has now rcacbcd the suge where it must establish proper
guidcIincs on hew lo handle clcctronic texls including caialoguing and
copyrighi issues.
HUMANISTISKE DATA 291 13