Advertisement

Battle Without FAIR and Easy Data in Digital Humanities

An Empirical Research on the Challenges of Open Data and APIs for the James Cook Dynamic Journal
  • Go Sugimoto
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 755)

Abstract

There are theoretical and technical challenges for Digital Humanities scholars to develop and use Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). Whilst data owning culture in our institutional settings seems to hinder truly interdisciplinary research, the emergence of Linked Open Data implies the increasing opportunities of distributed-data research. This article is based on an API application to address those issues in the context of Open Data. James Cook Dynamic Journal was created to assist users to study the Cook’s journal, integrating various sets of APIs which facilitate full-text search, Named Entity Recognition, and map views. The development revealed some critical issues of data federation and processing automation. The standardization of data structure and the development of user-friendly GUI tools would significantly increase the value of APIs. Taking recent initiatives into account, the paper also proposes “Easy Data” to liberate Open Data for a wider spectrum of users outside the programmer community.

Keywords

API Digital Humanities James Cook Open Data FAIR principles Easy Data 

References

  1. 1.
    Bülthoff, F., Maleshkova, M.: RESTful or RESTless – current state of today’s top web APIs. In: Presutti, V., Blomqvist, E., Troncy, R., Sack, H., Papadakis, I., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8798, pp. 64–74. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11955-7_6. Accessed 5 July 2017Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cohen, D.: Do APIs have a place in the digital humanities? (2005). http://www.dancohen.org/2005/11/21/do-apis-have-a-place-in-the-digital-humanities/. Accessed 5 July 2017
  3. 3.
    Colpaert, P.: Publishing Data for Maximized Reuse. SALAD@ESWC (2014). https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Publishing-Data-for-Maximized-Reuse-Colpaert/60abcbfc31437202e81b06cfed391974b294f09a. Accessed 5 July 2017
  4. 4.
    Maegaard, B., Van Uytvanck, D., Krauwer, S.: D5.4 CLARIN value proposition (2016). https://office.clarin.eu/v/CE-2016-0847-CLARINPLUS-D5_4.pdf. Accessed 5 July 2017
  5. 5.
    Murdock, J., Allen, C.: InPhO for all: why APIs matter. J. Chic. Colloq. Digit. Hum. Comput. Sci. 1–6 (2011). https://letterpress.uchicago.edu/index.php/jdhcs/article/view/88. Accessed 5 July 2017
  6. 6.
    O’Sullivan, J., Jakacki, D., Galvin, M.: Programming in the digital humanities. Digit. Sch. Hum 30 (suppl_1), i142–i147 (2015). https://academic.oup.com/dsh/article/30/suppl_1/i142/364055/Programming-in-the-Digital-Humanities. Accessed 5 July 2017
  7. 7.
    Renzel, D., Schlebusch, P., Klamma, R.: Today’s top “RESTful” services and why they are not RESTful. In: Wang, X.S., Cruz, I., Delis, A., Huang, G. (eds.) WISE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7651, pp. 354–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35063-4_26. Accessed 5 July 2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richardson, L., Amundsen, M., Ruby, S.: RESTful Web APIs. O’Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schreibman, S., Hanlon, A.M.: Determining value for digital humanities tools: report on a survey of tool developers. Digit. Hum. Q. 4(2) (2010). http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/4/2/000083/000083.html. Accessed 5 July 2017
  10. 10.
    Verborgh, R.: The lie of the API (2013). https://ruben.verborgh.org/blog/2013/11/29/the-lie-of-the-api/. Accessed 5 July 2017
  11. 11.
    Wilkinson, M.D., et al.: The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18. Accessed 5 July 2017

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities, Austrian Academy of SciencesViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations