This year saw the official launch of DHQ with the first issue appearing on April 2, 2007. The journal was given good publicity in a number of blogs and other venues, and was also announced on a wide range of discussion lists. The first issue has received praise from readers and authors. With the first issue out, we have applied for an ISSN and once that is secured we will also receive an listing in the Directory of Open Access Journals.
With the first issue our focus was on achieving a basic level of functionality for the journal: the solidification of the schemas, stylesheets, and content management software required to publish from XML source. During the course of the next year we will be adding new features including a blog, reader comments, and a search interface.
The DHQ editors have maintained regular communication with LLC, beginning with a joint dinner meeting at DH2006, and continuing with Melissa Terras acting as liaison. There is continued discussion on several issues: on how to collaborate on issues like recruiting and reviewing, on how to articulate the differences between the two journals, and on the possibility of joint publication of some materials. The relationship between the two journals has been very successful thus far.
The total volume of paid work this year was less than expected, for three reasons: first, because of difficulties in hiring and retaining a technical assistant (who would work with the Technical Editor in implementing the publication system); second, because the first issue of the journal appeared late in the year, diminishing the total number of articles processed and hence the labor of copyediting and encoding them; and third, because the total submissions are not yet up to the levels we hope for (hence reducing the work of communicating with authors and reviewers). Some of the work for which we expected to pay (such as copyediting) was done on a volunteer basis, but this is clearly unsustainable and we do not expect it to continue. The technical assistant was paid $2028 out of a budgeted $6500, and the managing editor was paid $1260 out of a budgeted $6000. The only other costs incurred were for various forms of publicity: sponsorship (with LLC) of a reception at the TEI annual meeting, brochures for distribution, and business cards for the DHQ editors. The total cost for publicity materials was $1237.
Brought forward: $385
Total income: $15,885
Managing editor: $1260
Technical assistant: $2028
Publicity materials: $1237
Total expenses: $4525
2006-2007 budget surplus: $11,360.
In 2007-2008 we anticipate that the journal's expenditures will more closely match the projected budget, because of regularly appearing issues and a higher volume of submissions requiring review and management. We also expect to make fuller use of the technical assistant as we develop the journal's interface and more advanced features.
In 2006-2007 DHQ received 24 article submissions, eight interactive multimedia submissions, and four special issue proposals. Two articles were submitted in XML using the newly developed DHQ authoring schema.
Staffing and community involvement
We have been fortunate to recruit a very talented and hardworking editorial team for the journal's first year. The currently active roles are:
General editors (3): Julia Flanders, Wendell Piez, Melissa Terras
Articles editors (2): Matthew Kirschenbaum and Adriaan van der Weel
Technical editor: John Walsh
Reviews editor: Richard Giordano
Issues in Humanities Computing editor: Joseph Raben
Interactive Multimedia editors (2): Melissa Terras and Geoffrey Rockwell
Web designer and usability specialist: Michelle Dalmau
Technical consultant: Amit Kumar
Graphic designer: Erik Resly
Managing editor: Melanie Kohnen
The role of Internationalization Editor is currently vacant as we seek to replace Elisabeth Burr, who has taken on broader responsibilities for internationalization and multiculturalism within ADHO. In the course of the coming year we will consider recruiting additional editors in specific subject areas to ensure broad and balanced coverage of the field.
We have also recruited 113 peer reviewers, about a third of whom have actually been called upon to perform a review.