On the London School of Economics Review of Books blog, Peter Webster has said some very nice things about our edited book from last year

Anyone concerned with the future of digital humanities research will find much to ponder in this timely and important collection of essays, recommends Peter Webster..

This collection of essays is a very valuable contribution to that process of assessment, and deserves to be widely read. It will be of interest not only to humanities scholars, but also to those in the GLAM sector concerned with user engagement and access, as well as policymakers in and around government… Readers will differ on the answers to this question, but anyone concerned with the future of digital humanities research will find much to ponder in this timely and important collection of essays.

as well as making some good points and raising pertinent questions about infrastructure:

Beyond this book, however, the wider debate about how to enable distributed humanities scholarship is still often framed in terms of the shape that such infrastructures should take; their desirability in principle is not often stated as such, but is assumed. Andrew Prescott has rightly taken issue with the whole metaphor of infrastructure as an unhelpful way of imagining what is required (1). To envisage things in terms of infrastructure implies permanence, rigidity, standardisation.

Thanks Peter.

Thanks also to the editors and authors who kept this book in progress, to DIGHUMLAB (especially Marianne Ping Huang) and EADH and the National Museum of Denmark for supporting and hosting it…

I’d also like to thank those who supported disseminating news of this edited collection, including

https://pro.europeana.eu/post/cultural-heritage-infrastructure-in-digital-humanities

and London School of Economics..