A Turn Towards the Digital. An Overview of Swedish Heritage Information Management Today

Löwenborg, Daniel; Jonsson, Maria; Larsson, Åsa M.; Nordinge, Johan

doi:10.11141/ia.58.19

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Åren 2020-2023 pågår ett samarbetsprojekt mellan Uppsala universitet och Riksantikvarieämbetet, finansierat av Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, i syfte att rädda en del av den digitalt födda dokumentationen från Riksantikvarieämbetets arkeologiska utgrävningar och göra den FAIR. 31 Digitisering och digitalisering betyder alltså inte nödvändigtvis tillgänglighet, och även i de fall data görs tillgänglig för allmänheten kan detta ske med begränsningar. Att all information i ett samlingssystem inte kan vara öppet är självklart (till exempel den exakta placeringen av objekten), men riklig samlingsdata är av stort intresse för forskare och kan användas som underlag för datadrivna analyser.…”

Section: Tillgänglighet -Riksantikvarieämbetetunclassified

Hur FAIR är svensk digitiserad kulturarvsdata idag?

Ambrosiani¹,

Larsson²

2023

Lychnos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historical research is increasingly dependent on digital methods to find materials and information online. This requires a very different form of source criticism in order to understand what is available or not through different services. In this paper we present an overview of how digitalised heritage data from Swedish museums and archives are made publicly available on various platforms today, and highlight the often hidden challenges researchers face when trying to make use of them. The study is grounded in the FAIR data principles: to which extent is digitalised heritage data findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable? Content available through aggregated web services by the National Heritage Board, the National Archives and the Royal Library, among several others, are examined and compared. The published collections data of the Nordic Museum are used to highlight the limits of FAIR. We identify areas where lack of national strategies and good digital practices causes problems, and suggest ways forward. Digitalisation is much more than digital versions of analogue practices and materials. Trusted vocabularies combined with linked data and persistent identifiers will enable a richer and more multivocal heritage that is not restricted in space or to the information that fits onto a catalogue card. Researchers and heritage institutions need deeper collaboration to ensure digitalisation results in usable data, and they need to embrace good digital practices.

show abstract

Section: Tillgänglighet -Riksantikvarieämbetetunclassified

Hur FAIR är svensk digitiserad kulturarvsdata idag?

Ambrosiani¹,

Larsson²

2023

Lychnos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In practice, datasets often move from one context to another-with different minor or major implications for who gets access to the data-even when they are produced by major public actors. For example, the analysed dataset was passed from the Swedish National Heritage Board to National Historical Museums in 2015 when the state-run contract archaeology operations were separated from the archaeological heritage administrative organisation (see Löwenborg et al 2021).…”

Section: Challenges and Opportunities In Identifying Paradatamentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-purposing Excavation Database Content as Paradata

Börjesson

Sköld²,

Friberg³

et al. 2022

KULA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although data reusers request information about how research data was created and curated, this information is often non-existent or only briefly covered in data descriptions. The need for such contextual information is particularly critical in fields like archaeology, where old legacy data created during different time periods and through varying methodological framings and fieldwork documentation practices retains its value as an important information source. This article explores the presence of contextual information in archaeological data with a specific focus on data provenance and processing information, i.e., paradata. The purpose of the article is to identify and explicate types of paradata in field observation documentation. The method used is an explorative close reading of field data from an archaeological excavation enriched with geographical metadata. The analysis covers technical and epistemological challenges and opportunities in paradata identification, and discusses the possibility of using identified paradata in data descriptions and for data reliability assessments. Results show that it is possible to identify both knowledge organisation paradata (KOP) relating to data structuring and knowledge-making paradata (KMP) relating to fieldwork methods and interpretative processes. However, while the data contains many traces of the research process, there is an uneven and, in some categories, low level of structure and systematicity that complicates automated metadata and paradata identification and extraction. The results show a need to broaden the understanding of how structure and systematicity are used and how they impact research data in archaeology and in comparable field sciences. The insights into how a dataset’s KOP and KMP can be read is also a methodological contribution to data literacy research and practice development. On a repository level, the results underline the need to include paradata about dataset creation, purpose, terminology, dataset internal and external relations, and eventual data colloquialisms that require explanation to reusers.

show abstract

“…As Nicolson et al summarized, making data FAIR should become a cornerstone of archaeological research [1]. The FAIR principles have also been discussed in Nordic archaeology in recent years [2,3]. FAIR principles mean that the data should be made Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digging through Databases—A Case Study of Iron Age Sites in Finland by Generating and Analysing Keywords

Roiha,

Holopainen

2023

Heritage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary purpose of this study is to open the discussion of FAIR principles in Finnish archaeology. This topic has not yet been actively discussed in Finnish archaeology. In this study, we were testing whether adding keywords could increase the reusability of the Register of Ancient Sites, as the reusability level of the current register is low. The case study focuses on creating an overview of the Iron Age sites in the Itä-Häme area. Keywords were added for all of the 585 archaeological sites in the study area, based on field reports and find catalogues. After giving keywords to all of the sites, it was possible to make queries from the register and form a new, more detailed overview of the Iron Age sites in the Itä-Häme area. Our study revealed mistakes and ambiguities in the register, but adding keywords increased its reusability. However, it cannot solve the main issue: basic research has not been carried out extensively enough in Finland. Based on the overview, it can be seen that Itä-Häme was an active and important area in the Iron Age, and an especially meaningful possible new site type was identified; however, more research in this area is needed.

show abstract

A Turn Towards the Digital. An Overview of Swedish Heritage Information Management Today

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Hur FAIR är svensk digitiserad kulturarvsdata idag?

Hur FAIR är svensk digitiserad kulturarvsdata idag?

Re-purposing Excavation Database Content as Paradata

Digging through Databases—A Case Study of Iron Age Sites in Finland by Generating and Analysing Keywords

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About