• DARIAH EU
• Open Access close
• Publications close
• Research data close
• English close
• ZENODO close
• Mémoires en Sciences de l'Informati... close

DARIAH, the Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities, is committed to advancing the digital revolution in the arts and humanities across Europe, by connecting resources and tools with the emerging next generation of digital scholars. National audience

This report has been prepared by the “Bibliographical Data” Working Group of the DARIAH-ERIC consortium, which develops public digital research infrastructure for the arts and humanities. The Group consists of more than 30 members from 15 countries, most of whom are researchers and curators in the public sector who are engaged in bibliographical data (“bibliodata”) research and curation. This report is aimed at all active stakeholders in the humanities bibliodata landscape,especially public sector entities who may benefit from the Group’s insights and engage in cooperation to identify common interests, shape joint agendas, and achieve common goals. Those goals include creating shared infrastructure solutions, harmonising existing standards, and building partnerships to meet major challenges for contemporary bibliodata stakeholders. The bibliodata landscape is a dynamic ecosystem including the many stakeholders who produce, process, and use diverse bibliographical resources (datasets, tools, services). Following the digital revolution, this landscape has been reconfigured and a critical era is now upon us that demands closer investigation. This report analyses the state of the art by defining current bibliodata (Chapter 1), mapping the contemporary landscape (Chapter 2), identifying crucial stakeholder challenges and opportunities (Chapter 3), and offering recommendations for future cooperation (Chapter 4). This report presents an overview of issues in the bibliodata landscape. It is intended to provide a foundation for more detailed reports and case studies on the issues identified in this document.

Storytelling tools aim to leverage the technological restraints of creating and sharing digital narratives, allowing non-expert users to deploy projects and populate them with custom-made content. In other words, storytelling tools aim at giving space for diverse narratives to emerge and spread in the digital sphere. As facilitators of imagining and communicating ideas, they may also be considered incubators of rethinking societal challenges. The three storytelling tools developed in the framework of the HORIZON2020 SO-CLOSE project allow users to create and publish multimedia, multilingual and accessible digital cultural heritage projects. In this demonstration, we present the three tools: the interactive story map, the immersive web doc and the participatory virtual exhibition. We showcase the publishing interfaces (front-end), the authoring and content management system (back-end) and a use-case application (project). The present prototypes will be publicly released by the end of the project (December 2022). SO-CLOSE is a three-year project that aims at enhancing social cohesion through sharing the cultural heritage of forced migrations. Based on theories of cultural heritage-making, the project works towards exposing the commonalities of past and present experiences with the mediation of innovative digital tools and collaborative approaches. The act of storytelling becomes a premise for the potential of a better understanding between local communities and newcomers. In this context, the three tools are conceived and developed to empower cultural institutions and communities in building and publishing their digital stories. To achieve this, end-users were intensively involved in the design process, through participatory methodologies. Starting from a state-of-the-art tools analysis, the project collaborated with cultural institutions, NGOs, refugees and asylum seekers, local communities, researchers and policy makers in the requirements elicitation process (interviews and focus groups), co-design workshops and validation surveys. Overall, the users of the storytelling tools can create projects based on journeys, chapters or exhibitions, use modules that can be selected, shuffled and repeated, populate them with their own content – including 360 videos and images and 3D models – and carry out crowdsourcing calls. The projects are published online, with integrated features for accessibility, interactivity and data interoperability with other repositories. The use-case that will illustrate the tools application will be a pilot project of Greek Forum of Refugees, co-created together with three different refugee communities living in Greece and the Contemporary Social History Archives. posters & demos: 142

Entertainment is important. Stories and narration are constants in, if not a prerequisite for, human culture. Running on myths and their recitation in ritual settings, religions hinge on this fact. Nevertheless, this is a circumstance that has been sought glossed over within certain religious traditions dominated by intellectual guilds. Not least within specific Christian traditions. Christianity’s manyfold Protestant variations are, for instance, characterized by an intellectual proclivity for hermeneutically complex and challenging theories, while suppressing straightforwardly enjoyable stories. This proclivity could, further, be said to have fueled a so-called ‘disenchantment’ impetus imbued in processes going by the names of ‘secularization’ and ‘rationalization’. Such terms seek to catch the deep-rooted tendency among changing Christian clerisies to adapt to a naturalist worldview at the expense of stories about the fantastic. That is to say that myriads of theologians, pastors, and poets throughout history have aspired to prune and ‘demythologize’ the core Christian narratives. Though this trend is deep-rooted, it broadened and accelerated remarkably in Europe through the course of the eighteenth century. But, seemingly, stories and storytelling will out. The rise of the narratively enthusiastic Romantic Movement appears to have run on this hydraulic logic. Affected by this current, the highly influential Danish poet, pastor, and politician N.F.S. Grundtvig (1783-1872) re-enchanted Danish Christianity. At least he aimed to re-introduce an appreciation of wonder and storytelling – of an oral, narrative, fantastical culture – within Danish church life. The manifold fantastic beasts roaming his works are the residue of this aspiration. Word embeddings of these creatures tell the tale of a man laboring to reintegrate agency, plotlines, and narrative engagement into Christianity. This study combines simple neural embeddings and graph theory to represent the bestiary arising from Grundtvig’s 1073 publications in their tokenized, lemmatized, ‘algorithmifyed’ avatar. It is based on the digital scholarly edition Grundtvig’s Works. We have computed the distance between a set of so-called seed terms and the corpus lexicon. The catalogue of seed terms have been established following the 2538 entries of the so-called Mythological Register developed by Grundtvig’s Works. For each seed, the algorithm excerpted a pre-set number of primary associations of size m. These are the terms with the shortest distance to the seed term. For each of the m-terms the algorithm, furthermore, extracted a pre-set number of secondary associations. The next step was to compute the distance between these respective categories of terms; subsequently they were connected based on their distance under a threshold estimated from the distance variance structure. At the final stage, semantic clusters were unearthed by way of the Louvain method. These clusters are ripe with verbs, agents, and places whispering of glorious deeds and enchanting tales: of a revival of storytelling.

While remote collaboration is not new in DH, it has had a profound impact on the DH research, education and community in the past couple of years due to the health, security and financial crises. If absorbed appropriately, it can also prove beneficial in overcoming the various environmental, geographical, mobility and other barriers in the future, making DH more resilient, inclusive and diverse. This is why the main objective of the proposed workshop is to develop a better understanding of the dynamics on the Digital Humanities work floor when researchers, teachers and/or professionals with different areas of competence engage in remote collaboration to solve humanities research questions, and to explore how education and training of humanities scholars, cultural heritage professionals and technical experts can help making remote collaboration across disciplines more efficient and effective, more creative and innovative, and more inclusive and rewarding for all participants. To this end, we invite submissions reporting on all aspects and stages of engaging in remote collaborative research and teaching in DH, including the obstacles encountered and solutions found. We are also welcoming position papers on the role of research infrastructures to better facilitate remote collaboration in DH.

The dashboard will help OPERAS to oversee its activities in the different fields and as well understand the long-term impact of the Research Infrastructure (RI). It will support the governing assemblies to improve the impact and the performance of OPERAS and will define a procedure to do so. A dashboard for metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) will allow the OPERAS governing assemblies to steer and control the development of the OPERAS RI. The dashboard builds on a defined collection of metrics, KPIs and use cases in view of overseeing the different activities, results and improvements of the distributed RI. Not only is the list of metrics linked to the different pillars of the RI, but it also specifies the responsible persons in charge of collecting the relevant data for these KPIs at regular intervals. Furthermore, OPERAS members may benefit from service metrics as well, understanding the performance and usage better.

This document includes the UX questionnaire developed within the DARIAH-FI research infrastructure. The questionnaire was created and updated in several phases between 2022-2023 from semi-structured interviews, a literature review and tests with end-users.

John Unsworth (2000) proposed a tentative list of scholarly primitives, and although he made a reservation that it was not meant to be exhaustive, one omission is striking, namely the exclusion of communicating. It is even more visible once one realises that all the examples he provides in the paper of comparison IBabble), linking (Blake Archive), or sampling (VRML visualisation of Dante’s Inferno) have the indispensable communication component attached to them. The aim of this presentation is two-fold. First of all, we will reclaim the role of communication as one of the fundamental functional primitives, crucial in all stages of the research workflow. To use Unsworth’s nomenclature, communication takes advantage of the additive characteristics of scholarly primitives and enters into combinations with all other scholarly primitives. Secondly, right after reestablishing the communication as a scholarly primitive we will swiftly proceed to problematise the notion of its universality for all disciplines through exploration of the specificity of scholarly communication in the humanities. We will achieve that using New Panorama of Polish Literature (NPLP.pl) as a case-study, outlining the relevant digital infrastructure for the humanities. It has long been suggested that communication should be seen as a fundamental element of the research workflow, rather than an activity running somewhat separate to the research practice (Latour and Woolgar 1986; Garvey 1979; Galison and Galison 1997; Nielsen 2011). Recently this idea wass reinforced by Hillyer et al. (2017) who describe open science as “opening of the entire research cycle” and include communication as one of its key elements. It means that dissemination is no longer perceived as the final stage of a research process but becomes an integral part of all scholarly activities. New digital methods and tools (Dallas et al. 2017), including electronic communication and social media (Kjellberg 2010), facilitate this process. allowing scholars to communicate and collaborate with each other and the wider audience quickly and efficiently at all stages of their work. This also includes intermediary results of the work, including raw and secondary data (Castelli, Manghi, and Thanos 2013). The incorporation of communication into all stages of the research workflow also means that choosing a certain communication strategy is obviously influenced by the perceived goal, but also the goal influences other phases of the research process. This feedback loop more precisely on the example of NPLP, a research infrastructure for literary scholars enabling the creation of extended, multimedia monographs and presenting scholarly arguments through linking text with image, visualisation, map and video content. Yet, Creating a new digital collection forces researchers to rethink how their work is presented, categorised and displayed . For instance in "Postmodern Sienkiewicz" collection (http://nplp.pl/en/kolekcja/postmodern-sienkiewicz/) authors divided their articles into shorter fragments with additional iconography allowing for non-linear reading and access through image-interface. These activities required additional work on the stage of data collection, analysis and interpretation. In conclusion we will tackle upon the question remains to what extent such communication practices are universal for all sciences and what could be treated as reserved for the humanities in the spirit of Diltheyan disctinction between explaining (in sciences) and understanding (in the humanities). {"references": ["Castelli, D., P. Manghi, and C. Thanos. 2013. 'A Vision towards Scientific Communication Infrastructures: On Bridging the Realms of Research Digital Libraries and Scientific Data Centers'. International Journal on Digital Libraries 13 (3\u20134): 155\u201369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-013-0106-7.", "Dallas, Costis, Nephelie Chatzidiakou, Agiatis Benardou, Michael Bender, Aur\u00e9lien Berra, Claire Clivaz, John Cunningham, et al. 2017. 'European Survey on Scholarly Practices and Digital Needs in the Arts and Humanities - Highlights Report'. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.260101.", "Galison, Peter, and Joseph Pellegrino University Professor Peter Galison. 1997. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. University of Chicago Press.", "Garvey, WILLIAM D. 1979. 'CHAPTER 1 - The Role of Scientific Communication in the Conduct of Research and the Creation of Scientific Knowledge'. In Communication: The Essence of Science, edited by WILLIAM D. Garvey, 1\u201339. Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-023344-4.50006-4.", "Hillyer, Rebecca, Alejandro Posada, Denisse Albornoz, Leslie Chan, and Angela Okune. 2017. 'Framing a Situated and Inclusive Open Science: Emerging Lessons from the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network'. 2017.", "Kjellberg, Sara. 2010. 'I Am a Blogging Researcher: Motivations for Blogging in a Scholarly Context'. First Monday 15 (8). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i8.2962.", "Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press.", "Nielsen, Michael A. 2011. Reinventing Discovery\u202f: The New Era of Networked Science. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9517.html.", "Unsworth, John. 2000. 'Scholarly Primitives: What Methods Do Humanities Researchers Have in Common, and How Might Our Tools Reflect This?' In . King's College London. http://people.brandeis.edu/~unsworth/Kings.5-00/primitives.html."]}