Advertisement

Accessibility of Cultural Heritage Exhibits

  • Nikolaos Partarakis
  • Iosif Klironomos
  • Margherita AntonaEmail author
  • George Margetis
  • Dimitris Grammenos
  • Constantine Stephanidis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9738)

Abstract

The global impact of the digital revolution in the cultural sector worldwide brings about the need to ensure the accessibility of physical exhibits, interactive digital exhibits, digital media and digital content for disabled people. The paper addresses the accessibility of CH resources, and the need for a new approach to accessible user interaction with CH exhibits.

Keywords

Accessibility User interaction Cultural heritage resources 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by the FORTH-ICS RTD Programme “Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments”.

References

  1. 1.
    Aarts, E., de Ruyter, B.: New research perspectives on Ambient Intelligence. J. Ambient Intell. Smart Environ. 1(1), 5–14 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alcañiz, M., Rey, B.: New Technologies For Ambient Intelligence. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bell, J.A., Matty, S., Weisen, M.: MLA Disability Survey 2005. England: Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (2005). Web. http://www.nemo.org/fileadmin/Dateien/public/topics/Disability_and_museums/disability_survey_2005_summary_10447.pdf
  4. 4.
    Bortolaso, C., Bach, C., Duranthon, F., Dubois, F.: Co-design of interactive museographic exhibits: the MIME case study. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Council of Europe. Disability Action Plan 2006–2015 (2006). Web. www.coe.int/t/e/social_cohesion/soc%2Dsp/Rec_2006_5%20Disability%20Action%20Plan.pdf
  6. 6.
    Council of Europe. Recommendation R(92)6 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on a Coherent Policy for People with Disabilities (1992). Web. www.handicapincifre.it/allegati/RECOMMENDATION_R(92)6.htm
  7. 7.
    Council of Europe. Resolution of 6 May 2003 on accessibility of cultural infrastructure and cultural activities for people with disabilities. Council of the European Union (2003). Web. www.rech2006.com/download_files/resolution_en.pdf
  8. 8.
    Dudani, S.A.: The distance-weighted k-nearest-neighbor rule 4. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man 6, 325–327 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Economou, M., Meintani, E.: Promising beginnings? Evaluating museum mo-bile phone apps. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  10. 10.
    Flint, T., Turner, P.: The role of appropriation in the design of engaging artefacts. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  11. 11.
    Garzotto, F., Rizzo, F.: Interaction paradigms in technology-enhanced social spaces: a case study in museums. Proc. DPPI 2007, 343–356 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grammenos, D., Zabulis, X., Michel, D., Sarmis, T., Georgalis, G., Tzevanidis, K., Argyros, A., Stephanidis, C.: Design and development of four prototype interactive edutainment exhibits for museums. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Context Diversity. LNCS, vol. 6767, pp. 173–182. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hornecker, E., Nicol, E.: Towards the Wild: Evaluating museum installations in semi-realistic situations. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  14. 14.
    Iurgel, I.: From another point of view: Art-E-fact. In: Göbel, S., Spierling, U., Hoffmann, A., Iurgel, I., Schneider, O., Dechau, J., Feix, A. (eds.) TIDSE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3105, pp. 26–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kidd, J., Ntalla, I., Lyons, W.: Multi-touch interfaces in museum spaces: reporting preliminary findings on the nature of interaction. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  16. 16.
    Kortbek, K.J., Grønbæk, K.: Interactive spatial multimedia for communication of art in the physical museum space. Proc. MM 2008, 609–618 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leslie, M.: Applying basic design principles to technology in museums. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  18. 18.
    Pfeiffer, T., Liguda, C., Wachsmuth, I.: Living with a virtual agent: seven years with an embodied conversational agent at the heinz nixdorf MuseumsForum. In Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Savidis, A., Stephanidis, C.: Unified user interface design: designing universally accessible interactions. Int. J. Interact. Comput. 16(2), 243–270 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stephanidis, C.: Human factors in ambient intelligence environments. In: Salvendy, G. (ed.) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 4th edn. John Wiley and Sons, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Toyama, T., Kieninger, T., Shafait, S., Dengel, A.: Museum Guide 2.0 – an eye-tracking based personal assistant for museums and exhibits. In: Proceedings of Re-Thinking Technology in Museums (2011). http://www.idc.ul.ie/techmuseums11/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=15&Itemid=7
  22. 22.
    United Nations. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. UN, came into force 8 May 2008. Web. www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?navid=13&pid=150
  23. 23.
    United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. UN, 1948. Web. www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
  24. 24.
    Valli, A.: The design of natural interaction. Multimedia Tools Appl. 38(3), 295–305 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Krevelen, D.W.F., Poelman, R.: A survey of augmented reality technologies, applications and limitations. Int. J. Virtual Reality 9(2), 1 (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weisen, M.: How accessible are museums today. Touch in Museums, Policy and Practice in Object Handling. Oxford & New York:Berg, 2008 WebGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
  33. 33.
  34. 34.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikolaos Partarakis
    • 1
  • Iosif Klironomos
    • 1
  • Margherita Antona
    • 1
    Email author
  • George Margetis
    • 1
  • Dimitris Grammenos
    • 1
  • Constantine Stephanidis
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceFoundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH)HeraklionGreece
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CreteHeraklionGreece

Personalised recommendations