• DARIAH EU
• 2018-2022close
• English close
• Hyper Article en Ligne - Sciences d... close
• DARIAH EU close

International audience; DARIAH, the digital humanities infrastructure with origins and an organisational home in Europe, is nearing the completion of its implementation phase. The significant investment from the European Commission and member countries has yielded a robust set of technical and social infrastructures, ranging from working groups, various registries, pedagogical materials, and software to support diverse approaches to digital humanities scholarship. While the funding and leadership of DARIAH to date has come from countries in, or contiguous with, Europe, the needs that drive its technical and social development are widely shared within the international digital humanities community beyond Europe. Scholars on every continent would benefit from well-supported technical tools and platforms, directories for facilitating access to information and resources, and support for working groups.The DARIAH Beyond Europe workshop series, organised and financed under the umbrella of the DESIR project (“DARIAH ERIC Sustainability Refined,” 2017–2019, funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program), convened three meetings between September 2018 and March 2019 in the United States and Australia. These workshops served as fora for cross-cultural exchange, and introduced many non-European DH scholars to DARIAH; each of the workshops included a significant delegation from various DARIAH bodies, together with a larger number of local presenters and participants. The local contexts for these workshops were significantly different in their embodiment of research infrastructures: on the one hand, in the U.S., a private research university (Stanford) and the de facto national library (the Library of Congress), both in a country with a history of unsuccessful national-scale infrastructure efforts; and in Australia, a system which has invested substantially more in coordinated national research infrastructure in science and technology, but very little on a national scale in the humanities and arts. Europe is in many respects ahead of both host countries in terms of its research infrastructure ecosystem both at the national and pan-European levels.The Stanford workshop had four main topics of focus: corpus management; text and image analysis; geohumanities; and music, theatre, and sound studies. As the first of the workshops, the Stanford group also took the lead in proposing next steps toward exploring actionable “DARIAH beyond Europe” initiatives, including the beginnings of a blog shared among participants from all the workshops, extra-European use of DARIAH’s DH Course Registry, and non-European participation in DARIAH Working Groups.The overall theme of the Library of Congress workshop was “Collections as Data,” building on a number of U.S.-based initiatives exploring how to enhance researcher engagement with digital collections through computationally-driven research. In Washington, D.C., the knowledge exchange sessions focussed on digitised newspapers and text analysis, infrastructural challenges for public humanities, and the use of web-archives in DH research. As at Stanford, interconnecting with DARIAH Working Groups was of core interest to participants, and a new Working Group was proposed to explore global access and use of digitised historical newspapers. A further important outcome was the agreement to explore collaboration between the U.S.-based “Collections as Data” initiatives and the Heritage Data Reuse Charter in Europe. The third and final workshop in the series took place in March 2019 in Australia, hosted by the National Library of Australia in Canberra. Convened by the Australian Academy of the Humanities (AAH), together with the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) and DARIAH, this event was co-located with the Academy’s second annual Humanities, Arts and Culture Data Summit. The first day of the event, targeted at research leadership and policy makers, was intended to explore new horizons for data-driven humanities and arts research, digital cultural collections and research infrastructure. The two subsequent days focused on engaging with a wide variety of communities, including (digital) humanities researchers and cultural heritage professionals. Organised around a series of Knowledge Exchange Sessions, combined with research-led lightning talks, the participants spoke in detail about how big ideas can be implemented practically on the ground. This poster reflects on the key outcomes and future directions arising from these three workshops, and considers what it might look like for DARIAH to be adopted as a fundamental DH infrastructure in a complex variety of international, national, and regional contexts, with diverse funding models, resources, needs, and expectations. One major outcome of all workshops was the shared recognition that, in spite of extensive funding, planning, and goodwill, these workshops were not nearly global enough in their reach: most importantly they were not inclusive of the Global South. Our new DARIAH beyond Europe community has a strong shared commitment to address this gap.

International audience

The European Holocaust Research Infrastructure (EHRI) portal website aims to aggregate digitally available archival descriptions concerning the Holocaust. This portal is actually a meta-catalogue, or an information aggregator, whose biggest goal is to have up-to-date information by means of building sustainable data pipelines between EHRI and its content providers. Just like in similar archival information aggregators (e.g. Archives Portal Europe or Monasterium), the XML-based metadata standard Encoded Archival Description (EAD) plays a key role. The article presents how EADs are imported into the portal, mainly thanks to the Open Archive Initiative protocols.

In recent years, FAIR principles have come a long way to serve the global need for generic guidelines governing data management and stewardship. Considering their wide embrace and the support received from governments, policy-makers, governing bodies and funding bodies, FAIR principles have all the potential to have a huge impact on the future landscape of knowledge creation for the better. This opportunity, however, may easily be missed if the specific dynamics of scientific production are not addressed in its disciplinary implementation plans. With the goal of making FAIR meaningful and helping to realise its promises in an arts and humanities context, this paper describes some of the defining aspects underlying the domain-specific epistemic processes that pose hidden or visible challenges in the FAIRification of knowledge creation in Arts and Humanities. By applying the FAIR data guiding principles to arts and humanities data curation workflows, we will show that contrary to their general scope and deliberately domain-independent nature, they have been implicitly designed along underlying assumptions about how knowledge creation operates and communicates. These are: 1. scholarly data or metadata is digital by nature, 2. scholarly data is always created and therefore owned by researchers, and 3. there is a wide community-level agreement on what can be considered scholarly data. The problems around such assumptions in arts and humanities are cornerstones in reconciling disciplinary traditions with the productive implementation of FAIR data management. By addressing them one by one, we aim to contribute to the better understanding of discipline-specific needs and challenges in data production, discovery and reuse. Based on these considerations, we make recommendations that may facilitate the inclusive and optimal implementation of the high-level principles that serve the flourishing of the arts and humanities disciplines rather than imposing limitations on its epistemic practices.

The DESIR project sets out to strengthen the sustainability of DARIAH and firmly establish it as a long-term leader and partner within arts and humanities communities. The project was designed to address six core infrastructural sustainability dimensions and one of these was dedicated to training and education, which is also one of the four pillars identified in the DARIAH Strategic Plan 2019-2026. In the framework of Work Package 7: Teaching, DESIR organised dedicated workshops in the six DARIAH accession countries (Czech Republic, Finland, Israel, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) to introduce them to the DARIAH infrastructure and related services, and to develop methodological research skills. The topic of each workshop was decided by accession countries representatives according to the training needs of the national communities of researchers in the (Digital) Humanities. Training topics varied greatly: on the one hand, some workshops had the objective to introduce participants to specific methodological research skills; on the other hand, a different approach was used, and some events focused on the infrastructural role of training and education. The workshops organised in the context of Work Package 7: Teaching are listed below:• CZECH REPUBLIC: “A series of fall tutorials 2019 organized by LINDAT/CLARIAHCZ, tutorial #3 on TEI Training”, November 28, 2019, Prague;• FINLAND: “Reuse & sustainability: Open Science and social sciences and humanities research infrastructures”, 23 October 2019, Helsinki;• ISRAEL: “Introduction to Text Encoding and Digital Editions”, 24 October 2019, Haifa;• SPAIN: “DESIR Workshop: Digital Tools, Shared Data, and Research Dissemination”, 3 July 2019, Madrid;• SWITZERLAND: “Sharing the Experience: Workflows for the Digital Humanities”, 5-6 December 2019, Neuchâtel;• UNITED KINGDOM: “Research Software Engineering for Digital Humanities: Role of Training in Sustaining Expertise”, 9 December, London.

• To the extent that is has been theorised, work on DH pedagogy has tended to be very strongly tied to the classroom experience. A classroom experience, however, exists within a particular social and institutional framework (students seeking knowledge, experience or qualification from instructors who master a specific body of knowledge) which is quite different from the operational and distributed nature of Research Infrastructures such as DARIAH.• Research infrastructures seldom possess the kinds of specialised procedures, staff, resources and expertise to deliver formal educational programmes, but the strength of RI’s lies in the provision of and reflection upon the experience of acculturation and professionalization in “real” cross-institutional and often cross-cultural projects in which peer learning, skills transfers and network building are a rule rather than an exception.• Research Infrastructures such as DARIAH have a specific role to play in the European educational landscape by complementing rather than replacing the pedagogical models prevalent in HEIs today.• RI’s such as DARIAH should focus not only on DH or even on a discipline in which a student or researcher seeks to use DH methodologies, but also on highlighting how these practices engage interdependent communities of practice with intersecting concerns.• DARIAH should intensify effort to position itself as pedagogically relevant beyond the individual humanities disciplines in terms of what it can contribute to the development and dissemination of early-career researchers’ transferable skills and competences as identified by the Eurodoc 2018 Report.• DARIAH should establish an active educational partnership network in order to validate a new approach to the skills needs of humanities students and researchers, looking beyond the frame of what is currently available in the context of formal educational programmes.• DARIAH should develop a curricular model and, if possible, an internship program, to enable fluid exchange of knowledge and students between university programmes and the applied contexts of the research infrastructure.• DARIAH should continue to create and maintain essential filtering and contextualising layers for training materials, which are now available throughDARIAH-Campus, in order to coordinate and enhance open educational resources with other stakeholders in the field.• DARIAH should aim to apply and test its learning resources in different HE contexts in order to profit from unforeseen synergies and unexpected outcomes such as, for instance, the initiative to publish young researchers’ data papers using the DARIAH-Campus Event Capture Template, which emerged out of the DESIR Workshop at the University of Neuchâtel.• Building on currently identified needs, DARIAH should develop foresight models to predict future needs within the Higher Education sector.

In the DARIAH Open Access guidelines we propose recommendations to improve Open Access to publications in the arts and humanities. Our core aim is to bring closer the harmonized but transforming European Open Access policy landscape to the communities around DARIAH and recommend very practical steps to achieve compliance with it.; In the DARIAH Open Access guidelines we propose recommendations to improve Open Access to publications in the arts and humanities. Our core aim is to bring closer the harmonized but transforming European Open Access policy landscape to the communities around DARIAH and recommend very practical steps to achieve compliance with it.

International audience

A defining feature of data and data workflows in the arts and humanities domain is their dependence on cultural heritage sources hosted and curated in museums, libraries, galleries and archives. A major difficulty when scholars interact with heritage data is that the nature of the cooperation between researchers and Cultural Heritage Institutions and the researchers working in CHIs (henceforth CHIs) is often constrained by structural and legal challenges but even more by uncertainties as to the expectations of both parties.This recognition led several European organizations such as APEF, CLARIN, Europeana, E-RIHS to come together and join forces under the governance of DARIAH to set up principles and mechanisms for improving the conditions for the use and re-use of cultural heritage data issued by cultural heritage institutions and studied and enriched by researchers. As a first step of this joint effort is the Heritage Data Reuse Charter (https://datacharter.hypotheses.org/) establishes 6 basic principles for improving the use and re-use of cultural heritage resources by researchers and , to help all the relevant actors to work together to connect and improve access to heritage data. These are: Reciprocity, Interoperability, Citability, Openness, Stewardship and Trustworthiness.As a further step in translating these principles to actual data workflows the survey below serves as a template to frame exchanges around cultural heritage data by enabling both Cultural Heritage Institutions, infrastructure providers and researchers and to clarify their goals at the beginning and the project, to specify access to data, provenance information, preferred citation standards, hosting responsibilities etc. on the basis of which the parties can arrive at mutual reuse agreements that could serve as a starting point for a FAIR-by-construction data management, right from the project planning/application phase. In practice, the survey below can be flexibly applied in platform-independent ways in exchange protocols between Cultural Heritage Institutions and researchers, Institutions who sign the Charter could use it (and expect to use such surveys) in their own exchange protocols. Another direction of future developments is to set up a platform dedicated to such exchanges. On the other hand, researchers are encouraged to contact the CHIs during the initial stages of their project in order to explain their plans and figure details of transaction together. This mutual declaration can later be a powerful component in their Data Management Plans as it shows evidence for responsible and fair conduct of cultural heritage data, and fair (but also FAIR) research data management practices that are based on partnership with the holding institution. As enclosing a Research Data Management Plan to grant applications is becoming a more and more common requirement among research funders, we need to raise the funders’ awareness to the fact that such bi- or trilateral agreements and data reuse declarations among researchers, CHIs and infrastructure providers are crucial domain-specific components of FAIR data management.