A Data Infrastructure for Digital Cultural Heritage: Characteristics, Requirements and Priority Services

Fresa, Antonella

doi:10.3366/ijhac.2013.0058

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This extension, when paired with Sesame based triple stores, supports OpenGIS Simple Features including Point, Line, Polygon and GIS relations such as Intersects, Overlaps, and Crosses. 10 One of the advantages of using this extension is it provides new modern types of indexing such as GeoHash and Quadtree, PostgisIndexer, which should result in better performance, particularly in searching and retrieval of spatio-temporal data in the geospatial semantic web. On the other hand, the limitation of uSeekM is that it does not support multiple CRS but only WGS_84.…”

Section: Spatio-temporal Triple Storesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, poorly-linked CH data is fragmented in several national and regional repositories, backed by non-standardized search interfaces. All these technical challenges are limiting users' attempts to contextualize information from distributed repositories [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8https://www.blazegraph.com/ (last accessed on 9 April 2019) 9 https://jena.apache.org/ (last accessed on 9 April 2019)10 https://www.openhub.net/p/useekm (last accessed on 9 April 2019)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Survey of Geospatial Semantic Web for Cultural Heritage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amount of digital cultural heritage data produced by cultural heritage institutions is growing rapidly. Digital cultural heritage repositories have therefore become an efficient and effective way to disseminate and exploit digital cultural heritage data. However, many digital cultural heritage repositories worldwide share technical challenges such as data integration and interoperability among national and regional digital cultural heritage repositories. The result is dispersed and poorly-linked cultured heritage data, backed by non-standardized search interfaces, which thwart users’ attempts to contextualize information from distributed repositories. A recently introduced geospatial semantic web is being adopted by a great many new and existing digital cultural heritage repositories to overcome these challenges. However, no one has yet conducted a conceptual survey of the geospatial semantic web concepts for a cultural heritage audience. A conceptual survey of these concepts pertinent to the cultural heritage field is, therefore, needed. Such a survey equips cultural heritage professionals and practitioners with an overview of all the necessary tools, and free and open source semantic web and geospatial semantic web platforms that can be used to implement geospatial semantic web-based cultural heritage repositories. Hence, this article surveys the state-of-the-art geospatial semantic web concepts, which are pertinent to the cultural heritage field. It then proposes a framework to turn geospatial cultural heritage data into machine-readable and processable resource description framework (RDF) data to use in the geospatial semantic web, with a case study to demonstrate its applicability. Furthermore, it outlines key free and open source semantic web and geospatial semantic platforms for cultural heritage institutions. In addition, it examines leading cultural heritage projects employing the geospatial semantic web. Finally, the article discusses attributes of the geospatial semantic web that require more attention, that can result in generating new ideas and research questions for both the geospatial semantic web and cultural heritage fields.

show abstract

Section: Spatio-temporal Triple Storesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Survey of Geospatial Semantic Web for Cultural Heritage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Digital site preservation is crucial in modern archeological mapping. Developing digital technologies that meticulously document and preserve site data is a major issue in the cultural heritage domain (Fresa 2013;Wells et al 2014;Povroznik 2018). This priority is also reflected across national and international culture heritage groups and builds an important future iteration of archeological mapping (Historic England 2017; Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs 2017).…”

Section: Site Preservation and Documentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modern Archeological Mapping: Towards Immersive VR Use in Archeology

Pettitt

Fuhrmann

2019

Proc. Int. Cartogr. Assoc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> Detailed mapping is essential to systematic archeological practice and is conducted in five stages: identification, evaluation and excavation, site preservation and documentation, analysis and interpretation, and education. As archeological mapping evolves the five stages remain the same, enhanced by the integration of new geoinformation technologies to better record archeological information. Even with technological advances essential spatial data and mapping products are often overlooked when archeological information reaches the education stage. This disconnect occurs when artefacts are exhibited without considering communicating spatial context, i.e. presented behind glass cabinets. This is a critical concern as understanding spatial context is essential to grasping heritage site histories. As a solution to this wide-reaching issue in geovisualization and the digital humanities, this research proposes a framework for developing immersive virtual reality heritage site applications that preserve the spatial context of archeological mapping. Applying the framework, this research produced the heritage site application “VR Riverbend”, which successfully relinks archeological materials with essential spatial context. Thus, VR Riverbend connects archeological data with place, remedying issues of artefact/context disconnect inherent in traditional exhibits. Developing immersive VR heritage site applications following the introduced framework provides a solution towards effective spatial and often multi-layered archeological heritage site education.</p>

show abstract

“…But in the Smart City a vital component is given by the CH implicit to the concept of Smart City as social engine (Shapiro, 2006) and raw material of knowledge to be conveyed through the 'cross-communication among digital nervous systems' . Therefore, the Smart City became the engine for knowledge and conservation of CH conceived as a Smart City, in which a network of SCO generates and broadcasts knowledge actively and dynamically, instead of seeing it as passive devices to be managed is needed (Fresa, 2013). This means that the implicit knowledge in Cultural Objects is not only accessible in institutional sites deputies to their preservation and use, but it is 'distributed' through the city, directly and dynamically enacted by the same objects as associated with their own perceived reality.…”

Section: Sco's Framework and Its Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A design framework for Smart Cultural Objects

Gaiani¹,

Apollonio²,

Martini³

2015

Strategic Design Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays cities, as well as Cultural Heritage, are facing new challenges due to the public fi nancial straits and the increasing need to deliver innovative service to manage a wide heritage. Great expectations are in put the Smart City paradigm relying on the capability of the city to realize and scale up intangible infrastructures based on new typologies of partnerships for the development of services. The paper presents a design framework aimed to transform Cultural Items in Smart Cultural Objects (SCO), meant as sources and recipients of advanced information applied on 'Widespread Built Cultural Heritage'. The aim has been not just to enhance the artifacts with their own quality, but their unique social, communal, anthropological and urban-infrastructural meaning. The ability to manage effi ciently heterogeneous data and the levels of global connectivity, as well as the real-time interaction, perception, localization, communication, and identifi cation, made possible by cloud computing and Internet of Things, to allow the changeover from Cultural Objects to SCO. The framework, here exposed, aims to provide an extensive and robust theoretical support to design and to manage the processes of Cultural Objects and Cultural bins, implementing a methodological system and an advanced environment based on ICT technologies for recording, storage, processing, access and presentation of Cultural Heritage (CH) data in a Smart Management environment. The framework has been applied in two projects for a prototypical case study of widespread urban CH.

show abstract

A Data Infrastructure for Digital Cultural Heritage: Characteristics, Requirements and Priority Services

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

A Survey of Geospatial Semantic Web for Cultural Heritage

A Survey of Geospatial Semantic Web for Cultural Heritage

Modern Archeological Mapping: Towards Immersive VR Use in Archeology

A design framework for Smart Cultural Objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About