Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Achieving Interoperability between the CARARE Schema for Monuments and Sites and the Europeana Data Model
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Achieving Interoperability between the CARARE Schema for Monuments and Sites and the Europeana Data Model


Published on

Achieving Interoperability between the CARARE Schema for Monuments and Sites and the Europeana Data Model …

Achieving Interoperability between the CARARE Schema for Monuments and Sites and the Europeana Data Model
Antoine Isaac, Valentine Charles, Kate Fernie, Costis Dallas, Dimitris Gavrilis & Stavros Angelis
Paper at Dublin Core conference (awarded best paper award!), September 4, 2013. Conference site:

Published in: Technology, Education

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • Les Miserables: Victor Hugo’s handwritten manuscripts: BnF, public domain Matisse ‘53 in the form of a double helix’ The Wellcome Library (CC-BY-NC-ND) ‘ söprűtánc ’ – Hungarian traditional dance Hungarian Academy of Sciences Institute for Musicology, public domain ‘ Neurologico reggae’ Music album DISMARC – EuropeanaConnect Paid Access ‘ Castle of Kavala’ 3D exploration of a Greek castle Cultural and Educational Technology Institute - Research Centre Athen CARARE CC-BY-NC-ND
  • At a working level, we operate in a network of aggregators. We can’t work directly with 2,200 organisations, so we rely on aggregators to collect data, harmonise it, and deliver to Europeana. Aggregators are important because they share a background with the organisations whose content they bring together, so there is close understanding. The aggregation model enables Europeana to collect huge quantities of data from thousands of providers, through only a handful of channels.
  • This is to give you a very quick overview of the CARARE project and what we have accomplished and are working on. We are a best practice network funded under the ICT Policy Support Programme. We currently have 28 partners in 21 countries as well as several content providers who have joined with us to make their collections accessible in Europeana. Our partners comprise national heritage agencies, museums, research institutions and digital archives, all working to make their images, 3D-models, records and metadata accessible in Europeana.
  • Built on: CIDOC CRM MIDAS heritage LIDO
  • View the object at:
  • Transcript

    • 1. Achieving interoperability between the CARARE schema for monuments and sites and the Europeana Data Model Antoine Isaac, Valentine Charles, Kate Fernie, Costis Dallas, Dimitris Gavrilis, Stavros Angelis Dublin Core Conference 4 September 2013
    • 2., Europe’s cultural heritage portal Text Image Video Sound 3D
    • 3. Europeana’s aggregation network Museums National Aggregators Regional Aggregators Archives Thematic collections Libraries 29M objects from 2,200 European galleries, museums, archives and libraries CARARE
    • 4. CARARE: Bringing content for archaeology and historic buildings to Europeana users  When: 3 year project (2010-2013) Who: heritage organisations, archaeological museums, research institutions and specialist archives 29 partners in 21 countries What: delivering content to Europeana What: aggregation services and good practices for content relating to archaeological monuments and historic sites • Metadata repository (MORE) • Metadata schema http://www.carare.e
    • 5. CARARE Content  Images, text, videos, 3D models…
    • 6. CARARE Metadata Schema Heritage asset Digital resources Activities Collection 4 themes Acts as an intermediary between the native metadata of content providers and Europeana
    • 7. Heritage Assets Monuments, landscape areas, artefacts…  Title, Description  Characteristics • Type, Materials, Dimensions, Inscriptions • Spatial (place, address, map coordinates) • Temporal (date, time span, period)  Actors  Designation, Condition  References  Relations 7
    • 8. Digital Resources Images, texts, videos, audio, 3D models  Title, Description  Characteristics  Publication statement  Actors  Link to the object (URL)  Rights  Relations 8
    • 9. Europeana Data Model: an example
    • 10. Provided Cultural Heritage Object (CHO) and descriptive metadata
    • 11. Web Resources – digital representations
    • 12. Aggregations – Bundling it all together
    • 13. Objectives Mapping: finding correspondences between the elements of both models so that CARARE can send good metadata to Europeana Why is it important to report on this?  Mapping is rarely an easy issue  Models are complex, with subtle differences in world views  Both CARARE and Europeana benefits from “mapping meditation” One of the hardest (confronting) metadata exercises!  Sharing concrete experiences benefits to all Europeana partners And beyond: cf. goals of DC, “a metadata ecosystem”
    • 14. Questions so far?
    • 15. Mapping CARARE data to EDM A CARARE object becomes one or several EDM Provided Cultural Heritage Objects with:  Related web resources  Aggregations  Contextual information about place Some activity and spatial data cannot currently be mapped
    • 16. Creating EDM resources from CARARE data edm:ProvidedCHO HA:PamFond/1978155 ore:Aggregation Heritage Asset’s identifier PamFond/1978155 CARARE’s Heritage Assets always give raise to one EDM ProvidedCHOs with its companion Aggregation The next issue is whether CARARE’s Digital Resources are also EDM CHOs…  It depends on the collection!
    • 17. edm:isRepresentationOf edm:ProvidedCHO 1 edm:ProvidedCHO 5edm:ProvidedCHO 2 Scenario 1: cultural objects representing the CARARE HA count as CHOs
    • 18. edm:ProvidedCHO 3 edm:ProvidedCHO 1 edm:ProvidedCHO 2 Scenario 2: Digital Resources are cultural objects qualifying as EDM CHOs but some are shared among several Heritage Assets
    • 19. edm:ProvidedCHO 1 edm:WebResource 2edm:WebResource 1 Scenario 3: Digital Resources that are views of lesser cultural importance are treated as EDM Web Resources
    • 20. Contextual Resources – e.g., Places CARARE’s geospatial enrichment represented with EDM contextual resource class
    • 21. Conclusions CARARE provides better metadata to Europeana for 2M objects In the process  We identified non-trivial issues  We documented solutions (this paper!)  It prompted updates to CARARE’s schema (3D ICONS project)  It confirms the relevance of a richer model like EDM for Europeana  Human supervision remains crucial for choosing the right option Data curators can help here as with many other quality issues in data aggregation projects!
    • 22. Thank you! Questions? Antoine Isaac, Valentine Charles, Kate Fernie, Costis Dallas, Dimitris Gavrilis, Stavros Angelis