I'll just make a post pointing out that this post is okay, because it's about historiography (The practice of history). There's no violation of the 20 year rule here.

I love being able to get the documents I can from online....

The problem I see, is that we are at the mercy of whoever did the digitizing. Who knows who this person is, what they were being paid, or how menial they felt their job to be. Therefor, sometimes documents are scanned at weird angles, pages are missing, or inscriptions on the sides of printed source materials are cut off or erased- which can be a big deal when you are reading over government reports and those markings were done by some official reacting to the report.

I love the digital world- I am a child of the digital age- but it is still as fraught with problems as physical mediums.

will history and historians remain resistant to the apparent global shift to digitisation?

I'm not sure what you mean here. Majority of archival researchers I work with are gleeful to discover we've digitized any of the records they'd like to work with. Most of the historical scholarship in journals is now published digital only, digital first or digital concurrent to a print form. Major academic book publishers now publish an ebook version of all their new offerings in addition to the print form. I am actually trying to think of any big academic publisher who doesn't do ebooks and I can't think of one. Librarians still purchase more print books than ebooks, but that's just a cost issue for licencing the ebook vs. purchasing the print book, we do know ebooks are the preferred form for most of today's students and scholars. All the book galleys I get for review are either in PDF or one of the standard ebook formats. I'm just not sure how hipper historians can get?