Confronting disciplinary fragmentation
ResearchSpace is designed around an empirical ontology

Confronting disciplinary fragmentation
ResearchSpace is designed around an empirical ontology

Confronting disciplinary fragmentation
ResearchSpace is designed around an empirical ontology

In data network frameworks the potential of interconnection are apparent, but these have also focused on artificial categorisation (vocabularies) which are impossible to align either technically and meaningfully. In other words, data system suffer from exactly the same type problem as textual narrative but without any form of mitigating contextualisation.
However, with semantic data frameworks based on humanities knowledge systems there is a possibility of crossing disciplinary boundaries. For difference to be compared and reconciled and for similarities of detail and pattern to be established – reducing fragmentation.
The ResearchSpace and CIDOC CRM provides that framework. Many other Linked Data schemas are not ontologies, although they may use the same technical conventions, and simply introduce more artificial categories without context resulting in more fragmentation, resulting no effective progression.
In data network frameworks the potential of interconnection are apparent, but these have also focused on artificial categorisation (vocabularies) which are impossible to align either technically and meaningfully. In other words, data system suffer from exactly the same type problem as textual narrative but without any form of mitigating contextualisation.
However, with semantic data frameworks based on humanities knowledge systems there is a possibility of crossing disciplinary boundaries. For difference to be compared and reconciled and for similarities of detail and pattern to be established – reducing fragmentation.
The ResearchSpace and CIDOC CRM provides that framework. Many other Linked Data schemas are not ontologies, although they may use the same technical conventions, and simply introduce more artificial categories without context resulting in more fragmentation, resulting no effective progression.
In data network frameworks the potential of interconnection are apparent, but these have also focused on artificial categorisation (vocabularies) which are impossible to align either technically and meaningfully. In other words, data system suffer from exactly the same type problem as textual narrative but without any form of mitigating contextualisation.
However, with semantic data frameworks based on humanities knowledge systems there is a possibility of crossing disciplinary boundaries. For difference to be compared and reconciled and for similarities of detail and pattern to be established – reducing fragmentation.
The ResearchSpace and CIDOC CRM provides that framework. Many other Linked Data schemas are not ontologies, although they may use the same technical conventions, and simply introduce more artificial categories without context resulting in more fragmentation, resulting no effective progression.
The Problem with Vocabulary
All organisations use vocabularies to categorise their collections. These mostly revolve around object records, for example, object types, periods (particularly production), materials, techniques, subjects, etc. Depending on the organisation and the scope of the collection record these can be relatively simple or more complicated, particularly ones that use hierarchical structures. While most commentators recognise that local vocabularies reflect organisation specialisms, local references and dialects, a regular case is put forward to aligning these vocabularies with umbrella vocabularies, maintained by a consistent authority organisation.
The use of CIDOC CRM and patterns of information that incorporate wider contextual knowledge provides a means to address the needs of wider audiences and, at the same time use this real world context act as a “semantic glue”. By providing an ontological semantic framework, users can view the variations of vocabularies that are used in the same context and make their own minds up about which variation come within their scope of investigation.