Day 93 of #100DaysofDH: Contemplating what readers of a digital scholarly edition need, and have come across a few different points of view in recent days.

Krista Rasmussen in https://www.openbookpublishers.com/htmlreader/978-1-78374-238-7/ch7.xhtml#_idIndexMarker1125 identifies three reader roles (reader, user, co-worker), from which I infer that different interfaces may be appropriate for different roles.

@Huber_Digital advocates generating user stories, and doing audience testing, as is best practice for commercial web development https://twitter.com/Huber_Digital/status/1288835487260606466?s=20

DocuSky advocates separation of digital content and digital tools, i.e. don't build annotation tools into a digital edition, but let scholars work with the text in their preferred environment https://twitter.com/bodiesandstruct/status/1295397694056411136?s=20

"Fluid Matters" (ed. Natalie Köhle AND Shigehisa Kuriyama) demonstrates how a digital text doesn't need to conform to the restrictions of print. The chapters in this digital book are reminiscent of the parallax scrolling websites popular in recent years https://twitter.com/dambaras/status/1295791203036913666?s=20

The statement "background images and animations envelop words in an atmosphere of affect, shaping our reading experience in a way not unlike how music shapes our response to scenes in a film" got me thinking why do we present academic work in print, & how would other genres look