Internet as Subject Index?

The individual accounts of historians' research and archival work in Archive Stories: Facts, Fictions, and the Writing of History peaked my interest this week. Each of these archive stories gave a different view and personalized assessment of the objectivity of archives and documentary evidence. I found each article to be interesting and informative in their own right but one article especially caught my attention and got me thinking. Renée M. Sentille's chapter regarding the use of the Internet left me pondering many questions about the utility of Internet archival methods in their present functionality, especially in regards to historians. I agree with Sentille's assertion that the Internet is a valuable tool but in essence will always be virtual. The experience and knowledge gained by physical engagement with source materials is irreplaceable and at current technological levels not recreate-able on the Internet. Also I agree with his assessment of the Internet as a shifting and ephemeral thing which in most cases of historical inquiry offers up many social and popular conceptions. This can be seen in his inquiries on Adah Menken conjuring up volumes of pages with different views of her as Jewish, African American, Feminist etc. In my opinion and experience, the Internet is representative of all who connect and use it albeit not equally or uniformly. Pornographic, business, academic, government, and entertainment sites, especially from metropole nations (primarily the U.S.) seem to dominate the sources of Internet materials. Though the 'net has the potential, if economics and technology keep up, to encompass virtually all textual, artistic, and language based human interaction, this is not the situation today. I think that for one of the most technologically engaged and computer/Internet savvy portions of the population, college students (graduate included), the Internet functions as an amorphous subject index. This is to say that it is an index which does not really tie back to any specific place but serves often as a jumping off platform for the researcher to other affiliated subjects and points of views. Open source encyclopedias like Wikipedia often serve students as 1.subject director 2. index of terms and 3. annotated bibliography. Websites such as Wikipedia can function for researchers as a gauge of popular historiography of those who connect to it and use it. The Internet can inspire some bad impressions, especially in historians who base their proof on documentary and material evidence. The fact is, though, that if things continue technologically it will most likely come to dominate most language based transferences of information. I do not think that the book will be replaced completely but research and work in history will continue to become more Internet based as more resources become available and distant connections mandate. Sentille begs the question as to whether historians should develop complex search algorithms to aid in research and I agree. The Internet is inherently nebulous and changing, requiring complex modes of categorizing and searching increasingly larger and more complex archives. However, I think that historians, especially academics and scholars, must associate and connect themselves to the Internet on a much larger and more social scale in order garner its benefits. Open source encyclopedias represent a chance to allow communities to govern and arbitrate information for themselves. I think that professional historians, too, should organize on the Internet to facilitate open discussions of historiography.