Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ontologies for Cultural Heritage

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook on Ontologies

Part of the book series: International Handbooks on Information Systems ((INFOSYS))

Summary

In the cultural heritage domain information systems are increasingly deployed, digital representations of physical objects are produced in immense numbers and there is a strong political pressure on memory institutions to make their holdings accessible to the public in digital form. The sector splits into a set of disciplines with highly specialized fields. Due to the resulting diversity, one can hardly speak about a “domain” in the sense of “domain ontologies” [33]. On the other side, study and research of the past is highly interdisciplinary. Characteristically, archaeology employs a series of “auxiliary” disciplines, such as archaeometry, archaeomedicine, archaeobotany, archaeometallurgy, archaeoastronomy, etc., but also historical sources and social theories.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.icom.org

  2. 2.

    http://www.ifla.org

  3. 3.

    http://www.ica.org

  4. 4.

    For instance, those published by the conference series Computer Applications & Quantitative Methods in Archaeology http://caa.leidenuniv.nl/ proceedings/

  5. 5.

    Round Table discussion at the 8th EAA ANNUAL MEETING, 24–29 September 2002, Thessaloniki–Hellas, http://www.symvoli.com.gr/eaa8/mple.htm#P5

  6. 6.

    http://dublincore.org/

  7. 7.

    http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr

  8. 8.

    http://www.iconclass.nl/

References

  1. The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model, Applications, http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/uses_applications.html.

  2. The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model, References, http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/references.html.

  3. Conservation OnLine, Resources for Conservation Professionals http://palimpsest.stanford.edu/.

  4. HEREIN Thesaurus: European Heritage Network, http://www.european-heritage.net/sdx/herein/thesaurus/introduction.xsp.

  5. Simple Knowledge Organisation Systems (SKOS) - home page, http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos.

  6. STAR Project - Semantic Technologies for Archaeological Resources, http://hypermedia.research.glam.ac.uk/kos/star.

  7. Successive drafts of the model and minutes of the Harmonisation Groups meetings are available from the CIDOC CRM Web site at http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/frbr_inro.html and the FRBR Review Group Web site at http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/wgfrbr/FRBR-CRMdialogue_wg.htm.

  8. International Organization for Standardisation, MPEG-7 Overview ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 N6828 http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/standards/mpeg-7/mpeg-7.htm, 2004.

  9. T. Baker, M. Dekkers, R. Heery, M. Patel, and G. Salokhe. What Terms Does Your Metadata Use? Application Profiles as Machine-Understandable Narratives. Journal of Digital Information 2(2), 2(No. 65), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R. Bennett, Chr. Hengel-Dittrich, E. O’neill, and B. Tillett. VIAF (Virtual International Authority File): Linking Die Deutsche Bibliothek and Library of Congress Name Authority Files. In WLIC2006, Seoul Korea, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  11. P. Bonora, Ch. Ossicini, and G. Raffa. From Relational Metadata Standards to CRM Ontology: a Case Study in Performing Arts. In Proc. of CIDOC2006, Gothenburg, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J.M. Bower and M. et al Baca. Union List of Artist Names - A User’s Guide to the Authority Reference Tool, Version 1.0, Getty Art Information Program. G.K. Hall, New York, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A. Cali. Reasoning in Data Integration Systems: Why LAV and GAV Are Siblings. In Proc. of ISMIS 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2871, pages 562–571. Springer, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  14. D. Calvanese, G. Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, D. Nardi, and R. Rosati. Description Logic Framework for Information Integration. In Proc. of the 6th International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’98), pages 2–13., Trento, Italy, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Clauss. Epigraphic Data Bank http://www.manfredclauss.de/gb/index.html. Clauss/Slaby, 2003.

  16. N. Crofts, M. Doerr, T. Gill, S. Stead, and M. Stiff. Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model. Version 4.2 http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/docs/cidoc_crm_version_4.2.doc, 2005.

  17. A. D’Andrea and G. Ferrandino. Shared Iconographical Representations with Ontological Models. In Proc. of Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology Conference, CAA2007, Berlin, Germany, 2-6 April 2007. CAA.

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. Doerr. Mapping of the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set to the CIDOC CRM. Technical Report TR-274, FORTH-ICS, July 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Doerr. The CIDOC CRM - An Ontological Approach to Semantic Interoperability of Metadata. AI Magazine, 24(3), 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. Doerr. Modelling Learning Subjects as Relationships. Intuitive Human Interface, LNAI 3359:200–214, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Doerr, J. Hunter, and C. Lagoze. Towards a Core Ontology for Information Integration. Journal of Digital information, 4(1)(169), 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  22. M. Doerr and D. Kalomoirakis. A Metastructure for Archeological Terminology. In Proc. of the Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology Conference (CAA 2000), Ljubljana, Slovenia, April 18-21 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. Doerr, G. Markakis, M. Theodoridou, and M. Tsikritzis. DIATHESIS: OCR based semantic annotation of newspapers. In Proc. of the third SEEDI International Conference: Digitization of cultural and scientific heritage, Cetinje, Montenegro, September 13-15 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  24. M. Doerr and A. Sarris, editors. CAA2002, The Digital Heritage of Archaeology, Proceedings of the 30th Conference, Heraklion, Crete, April 2003. Hellenic Ministry of Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  25. M. Doerr, K. Schaller, and M. Theodoridou. Integration of Complementary Archaeological Sources. In Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology Conference, Prato, Italy, April 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ch. Fellbaum, editor. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J.-Cl. Gardin. The structure of archaeological theories. Studies in Modern Archaeology Vol. 3: Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology: A Flexible Framework, 3:7–25, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  28. P. Gorgels, L. Aroyo, Y. Wang, R. Brussee, l. Rutledge, and N. Stash. Personalized Museum Experience: The Rijksmuseum Use Case. In Proc. Museums and the Web 2007 Conference, Toronto, Canada, 2007. Archives & Museums Informatics.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Grant, editor. SPECTRUM - The Museum Documentation Standard. The Museum Documentation Association, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Grant, J. Nieuwenhuis, and T. Petersen, editors. International guidelines for museum object information: the CIDOC information categories. 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  31. M. Greengrass. E-science Challenges in the World of Historical Studies, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  32. T.-R. Gruber. Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43((5-6)):907–928, 1995. Special issue on Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation.

    Google Scholar 

  33. N. Guarino. Formal Ontology in Information Systems. In FOIS’98, pages 3–15, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  34. M. Guercio, J. Barthelemy, and A. Bonardi. Authenticity Issue in Performing Arts using Live Electronics. In Proceedings of the 4th Sound and Music Computing Conference (SMC07), pages 226–229, Lefkada, Greece, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  35. G. Guizzardi, H. Herre, and G. Wagner. On the General Ontological Foundations of Conceptual Modeling. In Proc. Conceptual Modeling - ER 2002: 21st International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, volume 15, pages 65–78, Tampere, Finland, 2002. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  36. P. Harpring. Proper Words in Proper Places: The Thesaurus of Geographic Names. MDA Information, 2(3), 5-12., 2(3):5 12, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  37. R. Heery and M. Patel. Application Profiles: Mixing and Matching Metadata Schemas. Ariadne, (Issue 25), 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  38. S. Hermon and F. Niccolucci. A Fuzzy Logic Approach to Typology Archaeological Research. In CAA 2002. The Digital Heritage in Archaeology. Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, pages 307–310, Heraklion, Crete, April, 2002 2002. Proceedings of the 30th Conference, CAA.

    Google Scholar 

  39. I. Hodder. The Archaeological Process: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishers, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  40. J. Hunter. Combining the CIDOC/CRM and MPEG-7 to Describe Multimedia in Museums. Museums and the Web, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  41. J. Hunter. The Role of Information Technologies in Indigenous Knowledge Management, chapter Chapter 9. Indigenous knowledge and libraries. Australian Academic & Researchers Libraries., 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  42. E. Hyvonen, E. Makela, M. Salminen, A. Valo, K. Viljanen, S. Saarela, M. Junnila, and S. Kettula. Museumfinland Finnish Museums on the Semantic Web. Journal of Web Semantics, 3((2)):224–241, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. C. Kakali, I. Lourdi, Th. Stasinopoulou, L. Bountouri, C. Papatheodorou, M. Doerr, and M. Gergatsoulis. Integrating Dublin Core Metadata for Cultural Heritage Collections Using Ontologies. In Proceeding of 10th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, Hanoi, Vietnam, 10-13 December 2007. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  44. M. Keynes. Ontology-driven Event Recognition on Stories. Technical report, KMI-TR-135, Knowledge Media Institute, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  45. C. Lagoze. Business Unusual: How “event awareness” may breathe life into the catalog. In Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control in the New Millennium: Confronting the Challenges of Networked Resources and the Web, Washington, DC., 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  46. C. Lagoze and J. Hunter. The ABC Ontology and Model. Journal of Digital Information 2(2), (Article No. 77), 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  47. P. LeBoeuf. Frbr and Further. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 32((4)): 15–22, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  48. P. LeBoeuf. Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (Frbr): Hype or Cure-All. Haworth Press, Inc, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  49. P. LeBoeuf, Ch. Lahanier, G. Aitken, P. Sinclair, P. Lewis, and K. Martinez. Integrating Museum & Bibliographic Information: The SCULPTEUR Project. In Proc. ICHIM 2005 Conference, Paris, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  50. J. Lehmann, S. Borgo, C. Masolo, and A. Gangemi. Causality and Causation in DOLCE. In Vieu L. (eds) Varzi, A.C., editor, Formal Ontology in Information Systems, Proceedings of the International Conference FOIS 2004, pages 273–284, Torino, November 4-6 2004. IOS Press Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  51. A. Magkanaraki, S. Alexaki, V. Christophides, and D. Plexousakis. Benchmarking RDF schemas for the Semantic Web. In Proc. First International Semantic Web Conference on the Semantic Web, number 12, pages 132–146, Sardinia, Italy, 2002. Springer Berlin/Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  52. J. Makkonen and H. Ahonen-Myka. Utilizing Temporal Information in Topic Detection and Tracking. In Proc. of the 7th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL 2003), pages 393–404, Trondheim, Norway, 2003. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  53. A. Maple. Faceted Access: A Review of the Literature, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  54. C. Masolo, S. Borgo, A. Gangemi, N. Guarino, and A. Oltramari. Ontology Library (final). IST Project 2001-33052 WonderWeb: Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web. Deliverable D18., 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  55. J. McCarthy. Programs with Common Sense, pages 403–418. Semantic Information Processing. MIT Press, Minsky, M. (ed). edition, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  56. C. Meghini, M. Doerr, and N. Spyratos. Sharing Co-reference Knowledge for Data Integration. DELOS Network of Excellence, 2007. In Second DELOS Conference - Working Notes. Pisa, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  57. A. Mikheev, M. Moens, and C. Grover. Named Entity Recognition without Gazetteers. In EACL, pages 1–8, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Boston Museum of Fine Arts. CAMEO: Conservation & Art Material Encyclopediahttp://cameo.mfa.org/.

  59. J. Mylopoulos, A. Borgida, M. Jarke, and M. Koubarakis. Telos: Representing Knowledge about Information Systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 8((4)):325–362, 1990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. International Council of Museums ICOM. ICOM Definition of a Museum http://icom.museum/statutes.html#2, 2001.

  61. International Council of Museums ICOM. ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums http://icom.museum/ethics.html, 2006.

  62. M. Patel, T. Koch, M. Doerr, and Chr. Tsinaraki. D5.3.1: Semantic Interoperability in Digital Library Systems. Deliverable, Project no.507618, DELOS, A Network of Excellence on Digital Libraries, June 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  63. JL. Peterson. Petri net theory and the modeling of systems. Prentice-Hall, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Oxford University Press, editor. Art & Architecture Thesaurus. Getty Trust Publications, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  65. SR. Ranganathan. A descriptive account of Colon Classification. Bangalore: Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science., 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  66. PA. Reed. CIDOC Relational Data Model. A Guide. ICOM/CIDOC, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  67. V. Roux and P. Blasco. Logicisme et format scd: dune epistemologie pratique a de nouvelles pratiques editoriales hermes. 2004. CNRS - editions.

    Google Scholar 

  68. K.G Saur, editor. IFLA Study Group on the functional requirements for bibliographic records. Functional requirements for bibliographic records: final report, http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm, volume vol. 19 of New Series. UBCIM Publications, Munich, 1998.

  69. E. Schulten, H. Akkermans, G. Botquin, M. Doerr, N. Guarino, N. Lopes, and N. Sadeh. Call for Participants: The E-CommerceProduct Classification Challenge. IEEE Intelligent System, 16((4)):86–c3., 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  70. The SHIC Working Party. Social, Historical and Industrial Classification (2nd edition). The Museum Documentation Association, Cambridge, UK, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  71. B. Smith. Ontology. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information, pages 155–166, 2003. Floridi, L. (ed). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  72. B. Smith. Against Idiosyncrasy in Ontology Development. In B. Bennett and Fellbaum C., editors, Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS 2006), pages 15–26, Amsterdam, 2006. IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  73. DA. Smith and G. Crane. Disambiguating Geographic Names in a Historical Digital Library. In Proc. of the 5th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL 2001), pages 127–136, Darmstadt, Germany, 2001. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  74. D. Tudhope and C. Binding. A Case Study of a Faceted Approach to Knowledge Organisation and Retrieval. DigiCULT, Resource Discovery Technologies for the Heritage Sector, (Thematic Issue 6):2833, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  75. D. Tudhope, C. Binding, D. Blocks, and D. Cunliffe. Query Expansion via Conceptual Distance in Thesaurus Indexed Collections. Journal of Documentation, 62((4)):509–533, 2006. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. M. vanGendt, A. Isaac, L. vanderMeij, and S. Schloback. Semantic Web Techniques for Multiple Views on Heterogeneous Collections: A Case Study. In Proc. of the 10th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL 2006), pages 426–437, Alicante, Spain, 2006. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  77. M. Vargas-Vera and D. Celjuska. Event Recognition on News Stories and Semi-Automatic Population of an Ontology. Web Intelligence, pages 615–618, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  78. SM. Vinas. Contemporary Theory of Conservation. Elsevier Oxford, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Martin Doerr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Inst. Informatik, Universität Koblenz-Landau, Universitaetsstr. 1, Koblenz, 56016, Germany

    Steffen Staab

  2. Inst. Angewandte Informatik und, Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, 76128, Germany

    Rudi Studer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Doerr, M. (2009). Ontologies for Cultural Heritage. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds) Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70999-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-92673-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation