Dear all, I am still participating in a Norwegian with the objectives to create (a) a common database and (b) a data repository for data from excavations. The excavations are documented in the Swedish system INTRASIS. For a more detailed description of the project and the state of archaeological data in Norway, see The ADED project - a Norwegian infrastructure for excavation data, Christian-Emil Smith Ore, Espen Uleberg in
https://ariadne-infrastructure.eu/the-ariadne-impact/ (a) The common database is implemented by a Norwegian commercial company (Geodata) is not in focus here (b) The data repository will be CIDOC-CRM-suite compatible and will be a contact point ARIADNEplus. I am responsible for this part. There are many formats for expressing data in a format compatible to CIDOC-CRM. A clear candidate is an implementation in RDF(S). RDF(S) has its peculiarities, and "...the CIDOC CRM has not been defined using RDF Schema itself, because it aims at providing the widest possible logical basis for comparing and integrating data implemented under different encoding paradigms, seeking a compromise between useful expressive power for the ontology and enough simplicity to be implementable in different relevant encoding paradigms, either directly by their built-inconstructs or requiring some additional S/W code... (http://cidoc-crm.org/sites/default/files/Implementing%20the%20CIDOC%20Conceptual%20Reference%20Model%20in%20RDF_0.pdf) There exist examples of xml-serialized CIDOC-CRM data which are not RDF and in a 1-1 correspondence with the CIDOC-CRM ontologies. Do we still recommend this, and do we have any guidelines for such formats? Best, Christian-Emil ??
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
