A case study on propagating and updating provenance information using the CIDOC CRM

Strubulis, Christos; Flouris, Giorgos; Tzitzikas, Yannis; Doerr, Martin

doi:10.1007/s00799-014-0125-z

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 Strubulis et al provide a model for digital object provenance using inference and Resource Description Framework (RDF) triples (https://w3.org/RDF/) since storing full provenance information for complex digital objects, such as the large amount of Mars rover data they offer as an example, would be cost prohibitive. 7 In 2001, Arms describes the landscape of persistent Uniform Resource Names (URN) of Handles, PURLs, and DOIs near the latter's inception. 8 Recent work by Koster explains the persistent identifier methods most in use today and examines current infrastructure practices for maintaining them.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistent URLs and Citations Offered for Digital Objects by Digital Libraries

Homenda

2021

ITAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As libraries, archives, and museums make unique digital collections openly available via digital library platforms, they expose these resources to users who may wish to cite them. Often several URLs are available for a single digital object, depending on which route a user took to find it, but the chosen citation URL should be the one most likely to persist over time. Catalyzed by recent digital collections migration initiatives at Indiana University Libraries, this study investigates the prevalence of persistent URLs for digital objects at peer institutions and examines the ways their platforms instruct users to cite them. This study reviewed institutional websites from the Digital Library Federation’s (DLF) published list of 195 members and identified representative digital objects from unique digital collections navigable from each institution’s main web page in order to determine persistent URL formats and citation options. Findings indicate an equal split between offering and not offering discernible persistent URLs with four major methods used: Handle, DOI, ARK, and PURL. Significant variation in labeling persistent URLs and inclusion in item-specific citations uncovered areas where the user experience could be improved for more reliable citation of these unique resources.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Persistent URLs and Citations Offered for Digital Objects by Digital Libraries

Homenda

2021

ITAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current work in the Advanced Research Infrastructure for Archaeological Dataset Networking in Europe (ARIADNE) aims to develop an event-centric ontological representation of archaeological excavation by means of CRMarchaeo [160], a lower ontology extension of CIDOC CRM and the CIDOCsig digital provenance model [161]. Another, potentially fruitful strand of work within ARIADNE builds on an alternative, "wide and shallow" Cultural Heritage Abstract Reference Model (CHARM) [162] aiming to account explicitly for subjectivity and discursiveness in archaeological entity representation.…”

Section: Representing Archaeological Entities As Objects Of Curationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curating Archaeological Knowledge in the Digital Continuum: from Practice to Infrastructure

Dallas

2015

Open Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a "grand challenge" for digital archaeology, I propose the adoption of programmatic research to meet the challenges of archaeological curation in the digital continuum, contingent on curation-enabled global digital infrastructures, and on contested regimes of archaeological knowledge production and meaning making. My motivation stems from an interest in the sociotechnical practices of archaeology, viewed as purposeful activities centred on material traces of past human presence. This is exemplified in contemporary practices of interpretation "at the trowel's edge", in epistemological reflexivity and in pluralization of archaeological knowledge. Adopting a practice-centred approach, I examine how the archaeological record is constructed and curated through archaeological activity "from the field to the screen" in a variety of archaeological situations. I call attention to Çatalhöyük as a salient case study illustrating the ubiquity of digital curation practices in experimental, well-resourced and purposefully theorized archaeological fieldwork, and I propose a conceptualization of digital curation as a pervasive, epistemic-pragmatic activity extending across the lifecycle of archaeological work. To address these challenges, I introduce a medium-term research agenda that speaks both to epistemic questions of theory in archaeology and information science, and to pragmatic concerns of digital curation, its methods, and application in archaeology. The agenda I propose calls for multidisciplinary, multi-team, multiyear research of a programmatic nature, aiming to re-examine archaeological ontology, to conduct focused research on pervasive archaeological research practices and methods, and to design and develop curation functionalities coupled with existing pervasive digital infrastructures used by archaeologists. It has a potential value in helping to establish an epistemologically coherent framework for the interdisciplinary field of archaeological curation, in aligning archaeological ontologies work with practice-based, agencyoriented and participatory theorizations of material culture, and in matching the specification and design of archaeological digital infrastructures with the increasingly globalized, ubiquitous and pervasive digital information environment and the multiple contexts of contemporary meaning-making in archaeology.

show abstract