Widening the LP/LT community

[Shaw, Ryan]

As we discuss use cases and future directions for Linked Places and Linked Traces, I think it is important that we try to talk with as many people as possible who are working on scholarly linked data models for describing historical places, people, artifacts and events. This will also be important for potential future grant proposals.

Two such projects came up in the discussion today:

* Enslaved (https://enslaved.org)
* On These Grounds (https://onthesegrounds.org)

Another one that comes to mind is the Semantic Lab at Pratt (https://semlab.io).

Does anyone on this list have any contacts at any of these projects?

Are there other projects we should be reaching out to?

Cheers,
Ryan

[Karl Grossner]

Yes, WHG is in the process of accessioning a contribution from the
Enslaved project at MSU and have a pending call with Catherine Foley and
Alicia Schiell there. I also know the main ontology consultant for that
project, Pascal Hitzler, a leading semantics computing now at Kansas
State. He was one of the co-organizers of the meeting you and I
participated in a few years back at Wright State.

I don't know the On These Grounds project, but Ruth Mostern has had a
good connection with Sharon Leon, also at MSU.

I can make sure all of these people know of our group and a next meeting
when we schedule it.

Karl

--
Karl Grossner, PhD
Technical Director, World Historical Gazetteer
ka...@kgeographer.org
@kgeographer

[Chris de Lisle]

Dear all,

I didn't get a chance to introduce myself in yesterday's meeting before I had to run off; I represent the Attic Inscriptions Online project (https://www.atticinscriptions.com/), which has a range of different kinds of trace data relating to individual inscriptions (original locations, find-spots, current locations, places mentioned in) and the interesting (?) quirk that inscriptions are often in multiple pieces with different find-spots and current locations. As I said in the meeting chat, what AIO wants from LT (or LP if it expands to cover this) is an agreed ontology for these different types of "where". We don't really want to be defining the geometry & coordinates of a place etc - we want to link to a gazetteer that will do that for us (currently that's pleiades).

I think this sort of use case - a collection of individual objects with a range of different types of links to places is one that will be shared by a range of other projects (museums, libraries, other collections of documentary sources like papyri.info). 

Because our project is limited to ancient inscriptions from the region of Attica, this is also a project where being able to put our place data in a format that will be recognisable to other projects (what I hope LT will be) is a worthwhile venture - we're never going to cover inscriptions from other parts of Greece or inscriptions from non-ancient periods, but we want projects like Pleiades to be able to put our data alongside the data from projects that do cover other parts of Greece with minimal hassle.

I have provided an outline of how linked traces might work for our data in my previous emails, on the google group, and (with less success) on the github. I have to spend my current tranche of funding by June, so am going to action that fairly soon.

All best,

Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Linked Places" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linked-place...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/linked-places/F9E951C3-04B8-45D5-A6D4-5D9225E522F9%40unc.edu.

[Rees, Gethin]

Nice to meet you Chris, sounds like a really interesting project! It would be great to hear more.

In terms of other projects to reach out to I could contact Kevin Page from https://linked.art/ ?

Best,

Gethin

[Tom Elliott]

Hi all:

Sorry I missed the first two(!) meetings. I’m still interested.

To Chris’s important intervention:

This is indeed important to any project or dataset that deals with portable objects (whether they were intended to be portable in the past, or have been made so by virtue of spoliation, reuse, looting, collecting, etc.). CIDOC spends lots of specification on such “object history” issues, and so does EpiDoc/TEI, so there’s plenty of prior art out there to look at.

Tom

Tom Elliott, Ph.D.
Associate Director for Digital Programs
Senior Research Scholar
Institute for the Study of the Ancient World
New York University
https://isaw.nyu.edu/people/staff/tom-elliott

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/linked-places/CAMB9FStgcN%2Bt0WF63_C3oSQOrbd6iJXEWMJARE0JP6943RWfKg%40mail.gmail.com.