scholarsworking within China are highly encouraged to publish in journals that are indexed by standardservices like theArtsandHumanitiesCitationIndex. This removes any incentive to provide dataand publish within digital humanities projects whose output is not part of a standard recognizedindex. Database projects are not well suited to indexing services, because the metadata used byan index to determine frequency of publication and to quantify the output of the project are diffi-cult to measure in a constantly active database. Despite this limitation we have begun to archiveindividual entries from the project within UBC Library’s Open Collections service so that we canestablish a record of published entries with DOIs. This anecdotal evidence suggests that what wemight assume is a natural pull towards digital humanities publications as an indication of new andexitingmethodologiesmightbeabsentincertainacademiccontextsaroundtheglobe. Thisislikelyto change rapidly and we should be ready for any potential interest in our project despite its lack ofbelonging to an index. At the same time our attempts to publish within an open platform and issueDOIs are also a potential way to approach an indexing service and provide them with a historicalrecord of regular publication and proof of editorial oversight. An added benefit of archiving andpublishing with the UBC Library system is that it also serves as a data preservation method for ourproject,allthePDFsarestoredonUBC’sOpenCollectionsserviceandareopen-accessdocumentsthat the library has committed to hosting for the long future.
issues in uptake for non-traditional publishing in the Humanities; compensating values offered through library publishing & preservation platforms