Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural Heritage Data Management: The Role of Formal Ontology and CIDOC CRM

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Heritage and Archaeology in the Digital Age

Abstract

Building models for integrating the diverse data generated in Cultural Heritage disciplines is a long-term challenge both for securing presently generated knowledge and for making it progressively more widely accessible and interoperable into the future. This chapter reviews the multiple approaches undertaken to address this problem, finally proposing CIDOC CRM as the most robust solution for information integration in CH. The chapter begins by outlining the data challenge specific to the field and the main approaches that can be taken in facing it. Within this frame, it distinguishes knowledge engineering and formal ontology from other information modelling techniques as the necessary approach for tackling the broader data integration problem. It then outlines the basic principles of CIDOC CRM, the ISO standard formal ontology for CH. From there, an overview is given of some of the work that has been done both theoretically and in practice over the past five years in developing and implementing CRM as a practical data integration strategy in CH, particularly looking at model extensions to handle knowledge provenance across various disciplines and typical documentation and reasoning activities, as well as at successful implementation projects. Lastly, it summarizes the present potentials and challenges for using CIDOC CRM for solving the CH data management and integration puzzle. The intended audience of this chapter are specialists from all backgrounds within the broader domain of CH with an interest in data integration and CIDOC CRM.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Broader Term/Narrower Term

  2. 2.

    Related Term/Use For

  3. 3.

    http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/

  4. 4.

    http://dublincore.org/specifications/

  5. 5.

    http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/standards/mpeg-7

  6. 6.

    http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/

  7. 7.

    http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=57832

  8. 8.

    http://www.cidoc-crm.org/

  9. 9.

    Available at: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/index_main.php?l=e&c=656 as of 14/4/2016.

  10. 10.

    http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/3D-SYSTEK/

  11. 11.

    http://culturalheritageimaging.org/

  12. 12.

    Accessible at: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/index_main.php?l=e&c=663 as of 21/3/16.

  13. 13.

    https://www.ingeoclouds.eu/

  14. 14.

    http://www.ariadne-infrastructure.eu/

  15. 15.

    http://www.i-marine.eu/Pages/Home.aspx

  16. 16.

    Availabe at: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/index_main.php?l=e&c=711 as of 14/4/2016.

  17. 17.

    Available at http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/index_main.php?l=e&c=661 as of: 22/3/2016.

  18. 18.

    http://www.researchspace.org/

  19. 19.

    http://wiss-ki.eu/

  20. 20.

    http://erlangen-crm.org/

  21. 21.

    http://archesproject.org/

  22. 22.

    http://ontop.inf.unibz.it/

References

  • Allemang, Dean, and James A. Hendler. 2011. Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist – Effective Modeling in RDFS and OWL. Second ed. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoniou, Grigoris, and Frank van Harmelen. 2009. Web Ontology Language: OWL. In Handbook on Ontologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arches Factsheet. 2015. Getty Conservation Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aspöck, Edeltraud, and Anja Masur. 2015. Digitizing early farming cultures customizing the arches heritage inventory & management system. In 2015 Digital Heritage, 2: 463–464. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baca, Murtha, Patricia Harpring, Elisa Lanzi, Linda McRae, and Ann Whiteside. 2006. Cataloging cultural objects. A Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images. American Library Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagosi, Timea, Diego Calvanese, Josef Hardi, Sarah Komla-Ebri, Davide Lanti, Martin Rezk, Mariano Rodriguez-Muro, Mindaugas Slusnys, and Guohui Xiao. 2014. The ontop framework for ontology based data access. In The Semantic Web and Web Science, 480: 67–77. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergamaschi, Sonia, Silvana Castano, S. De Capitani Di Vimercati, S. Montanari, and Maurizio Vincini. 1998. An intelligent approach to information integration. In Formal Ontology in Information Systems, 253–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchou, Béatrice, and Cheikh Niang. 2014. Semantic mediator querying. In IDEAS, 29–38. BytePress. doi:10.1145/2628194.2628218.

  • Brachman, R.J. 1983. What IS-A is and Isn’t: An analysis of taxonomic links in semantic networks. Computer 16: 30–36. doi:10.1109/MC.1983.1654194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brachman, Ronald J., and Hector J. Levesque. 2004. Knowledge representation and reasoning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Calvanese, D., A. Mosca, J. Remesal, M. Rezk, and G. Rull. 2015. A “Historical Case” of ontology-based data access. In Proceedings of the 2015 Digital Heritage International Congress, 2: 291–298. IEEE. doi:10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7419510.

  • Carlisle, P.K., I. Avramides, A. Dalgity, and D. Myers. 2014. The Arches Heritage Inventory and Management System: a standards-based approach to the management of cultural heritage information. In CIDOC Conference: Access and Understanding – Networking in the Digital Era. Dresden. Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciula, Arianna, and Øyvind Eide. 2014. Reflections on cultural heritage and digital humanities: modelling in practice and theory. In Proceedings of the first international conference on digital access to textual cultural heritage, 35–41. DATeCH ’14. New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2595188.2595207.

  • Davis, Randall, Howard E. Shrobe, and Peter Szolovits. 1993. What is a knowledge representation? AI Magazine 14: 17–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doan, AnHai, and Alon Y. Halevy. 2005. Semantic integration research in the database community: a brief survey. AI Magazine 26: 83–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin. 2003. The CIDOC conceptual reference module: an ontological approach to semantic interoperability of metadata. AI Magazine 24: 75.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Ontologies for cultural heritage. In Handbook on Ontologies, 463–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, and N. Crofts. 1998. Electronic communication on diverse data-the role of an object-oriented CIDOC reference model. In 18th General Conference of the International Council of Museums and CIDOC ’98. Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, and N Crofts. 1999. Electronic esperanto: the role of the object oriented CIDOC reference model. In Selected papers from ichim99: the International Cultural Heritage Informatics Meeting. Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, and Gerald Hiebel. 2013. CRMgeo: Linking the CIDOC CRM to GeoSPARQL through a Spatiotemporal Refinement. ICS-FORTH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, and Maria Theodoridou. 2014. CRMdig an extension of CIDOC-CRM to support provenance metadata. Technical Report 3.2. Heraklion: ICS-FORTH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Christian-Emil Ore, and Stephen Stead. 2007. The CIDOC conceptual reference model: a new standard for knowledge sharing. In Tutorials, posters, panels and industrial contributions at the 26th international conference on Conceptual modeling-Volume 83, 51–56. Australian Computer Society, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Katerina Tzompanaki, Maria Theodoridou, Christos Georgis, Anastasia Axaridou, and Sven Havemann. 2010. A repository for 3D model production and interpretation in culture and beyond. In VAST, 2010:11th.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Athina Kritsotaki, and Katerina Boutsika. 2011. Factual argumentation—a core model for assertions making. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 3: 8:1–8:34. doi:10.1145/1921614.1921615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Ioannis Chrysakis, Anastasia Axaridou, Maria Theodoridou, Christos Georgis, and Emmanuel Maravelakis. 2014. A framework for maintaining provenance information of cultural heritage 3D-models. In EVA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Athina Kritsotaki, Yanis Rousakis, Gerald Hiebel, and Maria Theodoridou. 2015. Definition of the CRMsci an extension of CIDOC-CRM to support scientific observation. Technical Report 1.2.3. Heraklion: ICS-FORTH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doerr, Martin, Achille Felicetti, Sorin Hermon, Gerald Hiebel, Athina Kritsotaki, Anja Masur, Keith May, et al. 2016. Definition of the CRMarchaeo: An Extension of CIDOC CRM to support the archaeological excavation process. Technical Report 1.4. Prato, Italy: PIN S.c.R.L.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, J.W.D. 1978. Salience and relativity in classification. American Ethnologist 5: 66–80. doi:10.1525/ae.1978.5.1.02a00060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falkenberg, Eckhard D., Wolfgang Hesse, Paul Lindgreen, Bjorn E. Nilsson, J.L. Han Oei, Colette Rolland, Ronald K. Stamper, Frans J.M. Van Assche, Alexander A. Verrijn-Stuart, and Klaus Voss. 1998. A framework of information system concepts. The FRISCO Report. International Federation for Information Processing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerstl, Peter, and Simone Pribbenow. 1996. A conceptual theory of part-whole relations and its applications. Data & Knowledge Engineering 20. Modeling Parts and Wholes: 305–322. doi:10.1016/S0169-023X(96)00014-6.

  • Ghosh, Pallab. 2015. Google’s Vint Cerf warns of “digital Dark Age.” BBC News.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilchrist, Alan. 2003. Thesauri, taxonomies and ontologies – an etymological note. Journal of Documentation 59: 7–18. doi:10.1108/00220410310457984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giunchiglia, Fausto, and Pavel Shvaiko. 2003. Semantic matching. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18: 265–280. doi:10.1017/S0269888904000074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, Nicola. 1995. Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43: 625–640. doi:10.1006/ijhc.1995.1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997a. Semantic matching: formal ontological distinctions for information organization, extraction, and integration. In Information extraction a multidisciplinary approach to an emerging information technology, 1299:139–170. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997b. Understanding and building, using ontologies. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46: 293–310. doi:10.1006/ijhc.1996.0091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Formal ontology in information systems. In Formal ontology in information systems. Proceedings of the First International Conference (FOIS’98). Trento, Italy: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, Nicola, and Christopher Welty. 2000a. Identity, unity, and individuality: towards a formal toolkit for ontological analysis. In ECAI, 2000:219–223. Citeseer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, Nicola, and Christopher A. Welty. 2000b. A formal ontology of properties. In Knowledge engineering and knowledge management methods, models, and tools, 97–112. Juan-les-Pins: Springer. doi:10.1007/3-540-39967-4_8.

  • Guarino, Nicola, and Christopher Welty. 2002a. Identity and subsumption. In The Semantics of Relationships, 111–126. Springer: Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, Nicola, and Christopher A. Welty. 2002b. Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM 45: 61–65. doi:10.1145/503124.503150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, Nicola, Massimiliano Carrara, and Pierdaniele Giaretta. 1994. Formalizing ontological commitment. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 560–567. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, F., L. Rodrigo, J. Contreras, and Francesco Carbone. 2008. Building a cultural heritage ontology for Cantabria. In Annual conference of the International Documentation Committee of the International Council of Museums (CIDOC) 2008. Athens, Greece.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebel, Gerald, Martin Doerr, Klaus Hanke, and Anja Masur. 2014. How to put archaeological geometric data into context? Representing mining history research with CIDOC CRM and extensions. International Journal of Heritage in the Digital Era 3: 557–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitzler, Pascal, Markus Krötzsch, Bijan Parsia, Peter F. Patel, and Sebastian Rudolph. 2012. OWL 2 Primer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra, Rinke. 2009. Ontology Representation – Design Patterns and Ontologies that Make Sense. 10.3233/978-1-60750-013-1-i, IOS Press 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO. 2016. ISO Standards Website. ISO. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/faqs/faqs_standards.htm. Accessed April 15.

  • ISO 21127:2014 – Information and documentation – a reference ontology for the interchange of cultural heritage information. 2016. http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=57832. Accessed April 14.

  • Kontchakov, Roman, Martin Rezk, Mariano Rodriguez-Muro, Guohui Xiao, and Michael Zakharyaschev. 2014. Answering SPARQL Queries over Databases under OWL 2 QL Entailment Regime. In The Semantic Web – ISWC 2014 13th International Semantic Web Conference, 552–567. Riva del Garda, Italy: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11964-9_35.

  • Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Boeuf, Patrick, Doerr, Martin, Ore, Christian Emil, Stead, Stephen. 2016. Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model. Technical Report 6.2

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Goff, Emeline, Olivier Marlet, Xavier Rodier, Stéphane Curet, and Philippe Husi. 2014. Interoperability of the ArSol (Archives du Sol) database based on the CIDOC-CRM ontology. In CAA2014. 21st century archaeology. concepts, methods and tools. Proceedings of the 42nd annual conference on computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology, 179–186. Archaeopress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Rond d’Alembert, Jean, Richard N. Schwab, and Walter E. Rex. 1995. Preliminary Discourse to the Encyclopedia of Diderot. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manola, Frank, Eric Miller, and Brian McBride. 2006. RDF Primer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Y. Marketakis, N. Minadakis, H. Kondylakis, K. Konsolaki, G. Samaritakis, M. Theodoridou, G. Flouris, and M. Doerr. 2016. X3ML mapping framework for information integration in cultural heritage and beyond. International Journal on Digital Libraries, June 2016. doi: 10.1007/s00799-016-0179-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markhoff, Béatrice Bouchou, Sophie Caratini, Francesco Coreale, Mohamed Lamine Diakité, and Adel Ghamnia. 2015. Semantic Web for BIBLIMOS (position paper). In Proceedings of the First International Workshop Semantic Web for Scientic Heritage at the 12th ESWC 2015 Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mascardi, Viviana, Valentina Cordì, and Paolo Rosso. 2007. A comparison of upper ontologies. In Dagli Oggetti agli Agenti Agenti e Industria: Applicazioni tecnologiche degli agenti software, 55–64. Genova, Italy: Seneca Edizioni.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masur, Anja, Keith May, Gerald Hiebel, Edeltraud Aspöck, and others. 2013. Comparing and mapping archaeological excavation data from different recording systems for integration using ontologies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messaoudi, T, Livio De Luca, and P Véron. 2015. Towards an ontology for annotating degradation phenomena. In Proceedings of the 2015 Digital Heritage International Congress, 2:379–382. doi:10.1109/DigitalHeritage.2015.7419528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira, A., L. Alvarenga, and A. de Paiva Oliveira. 2004. Thesaurus and ontology: a study of the definitions found in the computer and information science literature, by means of an analytical-synthetic method. Knowledge Organization 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosca, Alessandro, Jose Remesal, Martin Rezk, and Guillem Rull. 2015. Knowledge Representation in EPNet. In New Trends in Databases and Information Systems, 427–437. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23201-0_43.

  • National Information Standards Organization. 2004. Understanding metadata. National Information Standards Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Guidelines for the construction, format, and management of monolingual controlled vocabularies. National Information Standards Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noy, Natalya Fridman. 2004. Semantic integration: a survey of ontology-based approaches. Special Interest Group on Management of Data 33: 65–70. doi:10.1145/1041410.1041421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldman, Dominic, Martin de Doerr, Gerald de Jong, Barry Norton, and Thomas Wikman. 2014. Realizing Lessons of the Last 20 Years: A Manifesto for Data Provisioning and Aggregation Services for the Digital Humanities (A Position Paper) System. D-Lib Magazine 20. doi:10.1045/july2014-oldman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Jeff Z. 2009. Resource description framework. In Handbook on Ontologies, 71–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadakis, Manos, Martin Doerr, and Dimitris Plexousakis. 2014. Fuzzy times on space-time volumes. In eChallenges e-2014 Conference: Belfast, United Kingdom, 29–30 October 2014. Belfast.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paveprime Ltd. 2015. CRMinf: the argumentation model an extension of CIDOC-CRM to support argumentation. 0.7. Heraklion: FORTH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, Patricia Ann. 1995. CIDOC relational data model a guide. http://icom.museum/resources/publications-database/publication/cidoc-relational-data-model-a-guide/. Accessed April 14 2017.

  • Rodriguez-Muro, Mariano, and Martin Rezk. 2015. Efficient SPARQL-to-SQL with R2RML mappings. Web Semantics Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 33: 141–169. doi:10.1016/j.websem.2015.03.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronzino, Paola. 2015. CIDOC CRMba: a CRM extension for building archaeology information modeling. Nicosia, Cyprus: The Cyprus Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronzino, Paola, Franco Niccolucci, Achille Felicetti, and Martin Doerr. 2016. CRMba a CRM extension for the documentation of standing buildings. International Journal on Digital Libraries 17: 71–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, Eleanor, and Barbara B. Lloyd. 1978. Cognition and categorization. Lawrence Elbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, Martin. 2013. A mapping of CIDOC CRM events to German Wordnet for event detection in texts. In 17th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries (TPDL 2013). Valetta, Malta: Vladimir Alexiev, Vladimir Ivanov, Maurice Grinberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, Martin, Günther Görz, Günther Görz, and Günther Görz. 2012. WissKI: A Virtual Research Environment for Cultural Heritage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Barry. 2006. Against idiosyncrasy in ontology development. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 150: 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa, John F. 2000. Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical, and computational foundations. Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staab, Steffen, and Rudi Studer, eds. 2009. Handbook on ontologies. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sure, York, Steffen Staab, and Rudi Studer. 2009. Ontology engineering methodology. In Handbook on ontologies, 135–152. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svenonius, Elaine. 2000. The intellectual foundation of information organization. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szekely, Pedro A., Craig A. Knoblock, Fengyu Yang, Xuming Zhu, Eleanor E. Fink, Rachel Allen, and Georgina Goodlander. 2013. Connecting the Smithsonian American Art Museum to the Linked Data Cloud. In The Semantic Web: Semantics and Big Data: 10th international conference, ESWC 2013, 593–607. Montpellier, France: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38288-8_40.

  • The Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. 2012. Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzompanaki, Katerina, and Martin Doerr. 2012. A new framework for querying semantic networks. In Proceedings of Museums and the Web 2012: the international conference for culture and heritage on-line.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzompanaki, Katerina, Martin Doerr, Maria Theodoridou, and Irini Fundulaki. 2013. Reasoning based on property propagation on CIDOC-CRM and CRMdig based repositories. CRMEX 2013 Practical Experiences with CIDOC CRM and its Extensions: 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. 1972. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Convention on the Protection and Promotion of Diversity of Cultural Expressions. UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uschold, M., and R. Jasper. 1999. A framework for understanding and classifying ontology applications. In KAW, unknown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vállez, Mari, Rafael Pedraza-Jiménez, Lluís Codina, Saúl Blanco, and Cristòfol Rovira. 2015. Updating controlled vocabularies by analysing query logs. Online Information Review 39: 870–884. doi:10.1108/OIR-06-2015-0180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verborgh, Ruben, and Max De Wilde. 2013. Using OpenRefine. Packt Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, S.B. 2013. From trees to Webs: Uprooting knowledge through visualization. In Classification and visualization: interfaces to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar. The Hague, The Netherlands: Ergon Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welty, Christopher A., and Nicola Guarino. 2001. Supporting ontological analysis of taxonomic relationships. Data & Knowledge Engineering 39: 51–74. doi:10.1016/S0169-023X(01)00030-1.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zúñiga, Gloria L. 2001. Ontology: its transformation from philosophy to information systems. In Proceedings of the international conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems–Volume 2001, 187–197. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Cultural Informatics, Institute of Computer Science-FORTH, Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    George Bruseker

  2. UMR 3495 MAP CNRS/MCC, Marseille, France

    Nicola Carboni

  3. School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts, University of California Merced, Merced, CA, USA

    Anaïs Guillem

Authors
  1. George Bruseker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicola Carboni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anaïs Guillem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Bruseker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Estudios de Arqueología Virtual, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain

    Matthew L. Vincent

  2. Instituto de Desarrollo Regional, Laboratorio de Arqueología Patrimonio y Tecnologías Emergentes (LAPTE), Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad Real, Spain

    Víctor Manuel López-Menchero Bendicho

  3. Cyprus University of Technology, Lemessos, Cyprus

    Marinos Ioannides

  4. Department of Anthropology, Center for Cyber-Archaeology & Sustainability, Qualcomm Institute, University of California, San Diego, California, USA

    Thomas E. Levy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bruseker, G., Carboni, N., Guillem, A. (2017). Cultural Heritage Data Management: The Role of Formal Ontology and CIDOC CRM. In: Vincent, M., López-Menchero Bendicho, V., Ioannides, M., Levy, T. (eds) Heritage and Archaeology in the Digital Age. Quantitative Methods in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65370-9_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation