2022
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-08812-4_49
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Porting of Semantically Annotated and Geo-Located Images to an Interoperability Framework

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The result is freely distributed and can be viewed with any IIIF-compatible viewer. In [2] authors describe an experience of porting a collection of semantically annotated images from a legacy content management system to a new technological stack made of independent open-source software to support the IIIF interoperability standard.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The result is freely distributed and can be viewed with any IIIF-compatible viewer. In [2] authors describe an experience of porting a collection of semantically annotated images from a legacy content management system to a new technological stack made of independent open-source software to support the IIIF interoperability standard.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Semantic wrapping of delivered images is supported as well by the IIIF standard. Cleopatra use cases exploit the IIIF annotation using concepts of a domain ontology and providing the support for indexing and discovering relevant contents by a SPARQL query [2]. Moreover, the annotations of enjoyed contents are stored in the user's profile to make the application context aware with respect to the user's preferences.…”
Section: B Users Interaction Iiif Sessionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GitHub, WebVR, The Wild, Unity, Unreal) lead to situations where each development team must start anew instead of building on work by others in the field (Bozzelli et al, 2019;Marto et al, 2022;Zhu, Fong, & Gan, 2022). Furthermore, there remains no international organization to provide interoperable standards for methodological reproducibility and to ensure the longevity of archived files and information (Jacobsen, 2007;Freire et al, 2013;Amato et al, 2022). Complicating the situation further, scholars often work with technicians that have specialized knowledge and training that preclude widespread adoption of their processes (Geng et al, 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite these technological advances, cultural heritage institutions in different countries are adopting different software, hardware, and development pipelines, making reproducibility, transferability, and interoperability a barrier to international and interinstitutional collaborative efforts. Furthermore, there remains no international organization to provide interoperable standards for methodological reproducibility and to ensure longevity of archived les and information (Jacobsen, 2007;Freire et al, 2013;Amato et al, 2022). Complicating the situation further, scholars often work with technicians that have specialized knowledge and training that preclude widespread adoption of their processes (Geng et al, 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%