Semantics For Cultural Heritage
•
1 like•317 views
This document discusses ontologies for cultural heritage management. It presents a continuum showing the increasing complexity from folksonomies to full ontologies. Folksonomies are personalized labels while ontologies have defined classes, properties, and allow for reasoning. Ontologies provide benefits like interoperability, consistency, dynamism, and improved discovery and analytics by establishing shared meaning. The document notes specifications and standards used in cultural heritage like CIDOC and Dublin Core and benefits of ontologies like authority, trust, provenance, and larger audiences. It provides examples of projects using ontologies like the MultimediaN Eculture Project and artifacts described like Maggie's ABC Book at the Powerhouse Museum.
Recommended
More Related Content
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Featured
Featured (20)
Semantics For Cultural Heritage
- 1. Ontologies for Cultural Heritage Management
- 2. Thesaurus Ambiguity Control Folksonomy Synonym Ring Synonym Control Hierarchical Relationships Personalized Labels Synonym Associative Relationships Control Scope Note (Equivalency) (BT, NT, RT, USE, SeeAlso) Less Complexity More Taxonomy Ontology List Ambiguity Control Ambiguity Control Ambiguity Synonym Control Synonym Control Control Hierarchical Relationships Hierarchical Relationships (BT, NT) Associative Relationships Classes Properties Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” The Continuum See NISO Z39.19-2005
- 4. Ontology Thesaurus Taxonomy Power Synonym Ring List Folksonomy Complexity The Continuum
- 5. “Instructions” by ex.libris | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 6. “Hand written card catalog” by blmurch | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 7. “This Much” by Your Pal Dave | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 8. “Card catalogs at Sterling Memorial Library, kept only for appearances” by ragesoss | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 9. “Girginakku” by prototypo | Flickr | © All rights reserved
- 10. Wonderful objects with no metadata (context) A secret garden “Secret Garden” by wonderlane | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 11. Objects with can’t-be- bothered metadata A maze “Longleat Maze” by odolphie | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 12. Lots of unmarked repositories Silos “Silo” by Plano Light | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 13. Medieval Folding Bed A tale of discovery ...and lost opportunity
- 14. “Hand-written catalog card” by prettydaisies | Flickr | CC Attribution 2.0 Generic
- 15. Specifications • AACR2 • CIDOC • FRBR • RDF • Dublin Core • OWL • EAD • SKOS • OAIS • OAI-PMH
- 16. Benefits • Interoperable • Consistent • Dynamic • Greater Return on Investment/Effort • Improved discovery • Improved analytics • Shared meaning
- 18. Benefits of Clarity • Authority • Trust • Provenance • Joint research / build on existing research • Larger audience • User engagement
- 19. Philanthropy Impact factor
- 20. MultimediaN Eculture Project
- 21. Powerhouse Museum Maggie’s ABC Book, 1894
- 22. Hard Rock Cafe Memorabilia Bo Diddley's Homemade Electric Guitar
- 23. Thank you Christine Connors TriviumRLG LLC TriviumRLG.com
Editor's Notes
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- A list can be a pick list, an index, an authority file Ambiguity Control Christine Connors vs. Christine Conners :( List of food We recently had a long holiday weekend, usually highlighted by barbecues, so let’s start with a list of food: hot dogs, hamburgers, buns, mustard, mayo, ketchup, onions, pickles, chips, salad, cookies, etc etc ----------- A synonym ring is what we think Roget’s Thesaurus is. Synonym Control (Equivalence Relationships) Ketchup or Catsup ---------- Hierarchical Relationships Is A, Part of type relationships Where would you put the poor tomato? Tomato - vegetable? Fruit? Both? It’s part of ketchup, should it be linked to ketchup under condiments? Mono-hierarchical vs. poly-hierarchical ------------ Associative Relationships - See Also Salt and Pepper - Spice? Condiment? Or would it be helpful to tell the user who is looking at Spices to also review Condiments? (or, do it for them -- Steve Krug’s Don’t Make Me Thnk) See NISO Z39.19-2005 BT = Broader Term NT = Narrower Term RT = Related Term (“See also”) SN = Scope Note UF = Used For USE = “See” (Refers reader from variant term to vocabulary term.) ------------ Get to define your own relationship types! Localization Annotation Reasoning “NOT” Ontology 101 by Natalya Foy and Deb McGuinnes Semantic Web for the Workind Ontologist by Dean Allemang and James Hendler ---------------------------- There is NO ONE RIGHT WAY to build any of these. They are an ART and a SCIENCE. The IA, UX, UI, etc - all human-computer interaction models for your system are important inputs to the design. How many of you shop for groceries? How many of you just go and walk up and down every aisle and grab what you like or think you need? How many of you just make a list as things run out, and then have to stop at the end of every aisle to look if there’s anything you need? How many of you have a list, organized according to your store’s layout?
- We have schema into which we plug the the terms from our various controlled vocabularies.
- We have accession numbers, shelf numbers, international standard numbers and still...
- … we’re limited in what we can find, and how we find it. Be it in print, or online finding aids.
- This is the card catalog room at the Sterling Memorial Library, Yale, kept around mainly for aesthetics. Metadata goes back quite far, actually.
- In the British Museum are girginakku, Mesopotamian library boxes that have clay tablet labels on them - metadata. This picture also shows fairly typical examples of museum metadata displays. So, we as a species have been creating content and metadata for quite some time. But the technological revolutions of the latter half of the 20th Century have given us a new frame of reference - a deeper intensity of information overload; we now have relevancy overload. So we’re formalizing logic in the languages of this new technology. We’re building data models for this new medium. Why?
- explore, discover, magic, enjoy, learn
- false starts, circular paths - much like enterprise data and paths through the web of unstructured data
- What’s in these silos? How do we get in safely and get back out cleanly? Silos are ok - as long as they are clearly marked, and can be connected to the preceding and following steps in the workflow.
- SCA, circus tent, need a bed, were given plans for a folding bed and this picture Needed more info on this bed, as it is COOL, would give us medieval street cred, and doesn’t look as dull as the plans. Obviously in a museum. Started digging around, found museum’s that have reasonably relevant collections. Got NADA online, on the public web and what “deep-web” databases I had access to. Posted the pic online, put it out to the network - sent a tweet. Within 1/2 hour, a friend reminded me about TinEye. Ran it through TinEye, got a hit. A random web page by some tourist, claiming it to be in a museum in Bavaria. Went to that museum’s site, and was very aggravated to see it was a site I had spent a couple of hours on poring through their image gallery, finding nothing. I would have excitedly shared the find with my SCA friends, on Facebook, on group mailing lists, on my website; asked if any of them knew SCAdians in Germany to see if they had more data. But I was so annoyed, I haven’t followed up yet. I’ll have to get over it soon, and see what I can learn over the winter so it can be built in the spring.
- So, I couldn’t find the bed using the museum’s existing systems. Why not? There are plenty of standards to use to catalog it and share it electronically.
- This is a fraction of the standards in the cultural heritage (museum, archive and library) space. The semantic web and RESTful architectures allow us to share the data globally. Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and many other online search tools now index semantic data to improve results. We need to encourage more cultural heritage institutions to take advantage of this evolving infrastructure. We also need to work with graduate programs to get these standards and specifications into the curriculum!
- These organizations need to put their collection data IN the web instead of simply ON the web. Just as we use ISBNs, ISSNs and other standard numbers, we need to embrace the methods being considered by diverse working groups to allow the data to be consistent. A common framework will allow us to use the data dynamically - from mashups to annotations. Consistent frameworks allow us to reduce costs in a few ways - shorter time period for learning new models, lower software costs for non-custom, COTS products. Our patrons win as well - they don’t have to learn new techniques for each data set. We gain shared meaning for concepts, reducing confusion.
- Communication, after all, is frequently a root cause of many good, and bad, events. “The Shannon–Weaver model of communication embodies the concepts of information source, message, transmitter, signal, channel, noise, receiver, information destination, probability of error, coding, decoding, information rate, channel capacity, etc.” On the web, separate protocols and languages handle similar concepts such as transport, encoding, noise reduction, feedback; all in the name of clarifying communication in a virtual space in a manner quite similar to the model defined here by a mathematician and information theorist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon-Weaver_model
- Exposure, recognition for work Identify works possibly targets or victims of theft/misappropriation of assets Sharing ~ embedding, commenting, tagging “Curate the content, not the container” Audience involvement. The stories, the facts, the beauty or repulsiveness of the artefact draws people in, and they are more likely to appreciate the efforts that went in to the collection and display of them. Engaged patrons are more likely to become loyal patrons, and more likely to become financially supporting patrons.
- Though no direct research could be found stating that donors want a “bigger bang for their buck,” various reports indicate that higher income, more educated patrons prefer to give to organizations that benefit the community ~ more people receive value for their donation than when they give for basic needs. People in this same demographic are also more likely to include cultural organizations in their charitable activities. They also indicate that they receive an intrinsic personal satisfaction from donating to their preferred organizations - it makes them feel good. SO, we need to make them feel good.