[...] the development of a set of e-culture demonstrators providing multimedia access to distributed collections of cultural heritage objects. The demonstrators are intended to show various levels of syntactic and semantic interoperability between collections and various types of personalized and context--dependent presentation generation.
[...] to demonstrate the use of semantic interoperability, semantic information access and visualization, and context-specific presentation generation. The project integrates results from computer science in the areas of: semantic Web technology, multimedia indexing and search, and web interfacing and data visualization to facilitate display of (part of) our cultural heritage.
A quick list of features:
I tried a few queries to see how the results are ordered, and the navigation organized. If we search for impressionism we get various results, ordered in the following manner: the first ones directly match the string queried in their main description (label)
Second line (AAT refers to the Art and Architecture Thesaurus): results from another metadata set, where the slot label matches the slot hasStyle
Fifth line: same as above, but for the student-of relation
Sixth line: inferred closure of an artist who worked in the same style of an artist matched above. That is, the rationale is that if they worked at least in one similar style, they are likely to be related even through other styles.
There's many other features, which I am not covering here. However, one remark. What's the purpose of this cool application? Probably it just wants to exhibit the semi-automatic agglomeration of data integrated from different and distributed sources. But they just remains data, they are not given any shape (e.g. thanks to the "semantic description") and they do not even reach the level of information, from my point of view (and also from an information visualization perspective see --> [Information Visualization, Robert Spence] ) .
Too many clickable links... I have the impression that these navigations, beyond being a technological show-off for data-integration and clustering techniques, very often go beyond being helpful in understanding a resource collection, but produce an overwhelming amount of results and links.
A reflection: we are using semantic data to get out of the "syntactic" data overload on the internet - but we are going straight into a "semantic" data overload .... The semantics we should support, instead, is HUMAN semantics, not just a formal semantic ......
Cite this blog post:
Digital Humanities Quarterly, Jan 2017. Volume 11 Number 1
International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-14), Riva del Garda, Italy, Oct 2014.
Digital Humanities 2013, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Jul 2013.
Lecture slides from the Course on digital history, part of the master in Digital Humanities at King's College, London., Oct 2011.
LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, Aug 2010.
Journal of Web Semantics, Sep 2007. Vol. 5, 2, (72-105), Elsevier
Wittgenstein and the Philosophy of Information - Proceedings of the 30th International Ludwig Wittgenstein Symposium, Kirchberg, Austria, Aug 2007. pp. 319-335
Fifth International Workshop on Ontologies and Semantic Web for E-Learning (SWEL-07), held in conjunction with AIED-07, Marina Del Rey, California, USA, Jul 2007.
International Workshop on Applications of Semantic Web Technologies for E-Learning (SWEL-06), held in conjunction with Adaptive Hypermedia 2006, Dublin, Ireland, Jun 2006.
Poster paper presented at the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC-06), Budva, Montenegro, Jun 2006.
International Workshop on Applications of Semantic Web Technologies for E-Learning (SWEL-05), held in conjunction with KCAP-05, Banff, Canada, Oct 2005.
2nd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC05), Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 2005. pp. 546-562