FVillaggi

This topic has been challenging and widely discussed. Here's a summary of what has been said:      

Before that, nevertheless, more than one issue has to be discussed.  

Frederic briefly summarized the current situation about our exchanges with WAB, starting with the exchanges Michele had with prof. Pichler ([[Private:Conversation with Alois Pichler]]). Regarding the technical aspects, WAB provides a three-layered (colored facsimiles of manuscripts and typescripts; a well-detailed "diplomatic" transcription of the original works; a "normalized" transcription of the bare text) digital archive of Wittgenstein's ''Nachlass''. If LWP's versions of Wittgenstein's texts have to be  linked to the WAB, the best option is to link them to the facsimiles.  

1) does LWP want to deploy this kind of link to WAB?   

2) in that case, what will be the long-term impact of this choice over the project and his aims?  

Frederic pointed out that WAB is mostly targeted to scholars who already have confidence with Wittgenstein's work, therefore the two platforms don't share the same kind of public. Nonetheless, a good diplomatic approach would be that to show willingness to collaborate, even if that could affect our future direction.

Jasmin added that WAB is a well-known and established institution when it comes to Wittgenstein. On the "political" side, then, it would be good to be known that LWP is collaborating or at least in harmony with them.

Michele asked if providing links to the facsimiles provides a supplementary value for our readers; he doesn't thinks so, but he admits that our public wouldn't be harmed by the links either.

Incidentally, more than one solution has been put forward in order to make the links available but discreet. Michele proposed inserting a toggle to show/hide the links. Jasmin suggested placing the links in the introduction captions to the texts.

In relation to all these matters, Michele raised a third issue: 3) provided that LWP's aim is to make as many as Wittgenstein's works possible, in several languages, available to as many people as possible (both specialists and non-specialists), which should be the editorial policy of LWP? Which kind of works do we want to publish? How and in which order do we want to make them available?  

Frederic exposed the alternatives for the short-term: a "breadth-first" approach (providing a wide offer of texts, in the order they are ready, even with few translations of the works) opposes to a "depth-first" attitude (focusing on providing good and many translations of the main Wittgenstein's works, notably ''Tractatus logico-philosophicus'', ''Philosophical Investigations'' and ''On certainty'', not excluding publishing any other text, but with less priority). The advantages of the latter alternative are that, in so doing, LWP could be clearly distinguished from WAB, offering a more accessible, curated and well-edited version of already published and well-known works, which are more appealing to a great audience. The other texts should therefore wait to be translated and refined later.

Michele agreed on the depth-first approach and on the distinction between "row" works (that WAB gives an overview of) and published ones (which are on LWP's website). He also expressed the concern that the already published texts should not be removed from the website; as well as new translations and contributes regarding minor works should be accepted anyways. In the end, he agreed on stressing the importance of major works and underlining the difference from WAB. Frederic agreed. Jasmin did too, adding that incomplete or improvable texts might be put in a separated area than the complete ones.

Conclusions: from now on, LWP will follow a depth-first editorial approach (smaller number of texts, but in higher quality and translations availability, not without curatorial work, if that is the case); LWP should engage an interaction with WAB, while letting the audience know that we provide digitalized versions of published works and selectively providing links for curated and complete versions; in the short term, as the "diplomatic" point of the collaboration stands, LWP will adopt a careful approach towards WAB, it being understood that the two projects do not overlap.  

 

Further discussion on if and how adding links to WAB on the website will be discussed in a later meeting.  

It's agreed to freeze the publication of Philosophie till the editorial policy issue is fully discussed.