Records in contexts: the road of archives to semantic interoperability

Abstract

Purpose -This paper examines the Records in Contexts proposal of a conceptual model (RiC-CM) from the International Council on Archives' (ICA) archival description and proposes an OWL ontology for its implementation in the semantic web.Design/methodology/approach -The various elements of the model are studied and are related to earlier norms in order to understand their structure and the modeling of the ontology. Findings -The analysis reveals the integrating nature of RiC-CM and the possibilities it offers for greater interoperability of data from archival descriptions. Two versions of an OWL ontology were developed to represent the conceptual model. The first makes a direct transposition of the conceptual model; the second optimizes the properties and relations in order to simplify the use and maintenance of the ontology. Research limitations / implications -The proposed ontology will follow the considerations of the final version of the ICA's RiC-CM. Practical implications -The analysis affords an understanding of the role of RiC-CM in publishing online archival datasets, while the ontology is an initial approach to the semantic web technologies involved.Originality/value -The paper offers an overview of Records in Contexts with respect to the advantages in the field of semantic interoperability, and supposes the first proposal of an ontology based on the conceptual model.

A knowledge graph of interlinking digital records: the case of the 1997 Korean financial crisis

“…Additionally, they promote the integration of metadata from numerous sources and the establishment of semantic links between archived materials and other relevant entities, such as people, organisations and events (Dow, 2009; Pacheco et al , 2023). In general, archival metadata standards aim to describe consistent rules for four object categories: archival resources, archival institutions, archival activities and persons or groups related to archival resources (Llanes-Padrón and Pastor-Sánchez, 2017). Several metadata standards have been developed and implemented in the field of record management, including EAD (Pitti, 1999), encoded archival context for corporate bodies, persons and families (CPF) (Wisser, 2011), international standard archival description general (Shepherd and Smith, 2000) and the international standard archival authority record for CPF (Thibodeau, 1995).…”

Designing User Interaction with Linked Data in Historical Archives

“…Records in Contexts (RiC) is an archival description standard proposed by the International Council on Archives (ICA) [13] that began its development in 2012 with a group of specialists from thirteen countries. This archival standard intends to implement the International Conceptual Model of Archival Description RiC-CM, in order to integrate the four existing archival standards: ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description), ISAAR(CPF) (International Standard Archival Authority Records-Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families), ISDF (International Standard Description of Functions), and ISDIAH (International Standard Description of Institutions with Archival Holdings) [16]. The RiC archival description standard is divided into two parts, the abstract conceptual model and the ontology.…”

Archives without a Lobby: On the Situation of Institutional Holdings in Galleries and Art Museums

“…Currently under development is an authoritative ontology that defines the relationships that are relevant for archival records. [27] Archives are therefore latecomers to a development that is already advanced in other areas. Based on RDF, the Semantic Web is not only designed to overcome the limitations of institutional data silos but has also, in the spirit of comprehensive interoperability, reconfigured the relationship between types of institutionsspecifically galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAM)-that have thus far operated mainly in isolation from one another.…”