RiC by SAPA: report (article)
210 views
Skip to first unread message
Baptiste de Coulon
Oct 26, 2023, 8:26:14 AM10/26/23
to Records_in_Contexts_users
Dear all,
We're pleased to announce that, after two years of implementing the RiC standard, the SAPA Foundation (Switzerland) has written a review article on the subject.
You'll find the pre-print version in an online dossier: https://cloud.sapa.swiss/s/89zapoC57XKQCGF
The article is in French, but we'd be delighted to hear from anyone interested in translating it into English. We have a budget for this. Thank you in advance for your information.
We would also be delighted to receive your comments on the content of our article. You can do so in this forum or directly at baptiste...@sapa.swiss .
We look forward to continuing the discussion together.
Baptiste
We're pleased to announce that, after two years of implementing the RiC standard, the SAPA Foundation (Switzerland) has written a review article on the subject.
You'll find the pre-print version in an online dossier: https://cloud.sapa.swiss/s/89zapoC57XKQCGF
The article is in French, but we'd be delighted to hear from anyone interested in translating it into English. We have a budget for this. Thank you in advance for your information.
We would also be delighted to receive your comments on the content of our article. You can do so in this forum or directly at baptiste...@sapa.swiss .
We look forward to continuing the discussion together.
Best regards
Richard Williamson
Oct 27, 2023, 4:34:13 AM10/27/23
to Records_in_C...@googlegroups.com
I look forward to reading the article in full! For now, I made a very
quick translation of just the conclusion section into English for some
colleagues, which I copy below. I hope that the translation is
reasonably accurate, but if I have mis-translated something, I would
be happy to be corrected; my French is somewhat rusty!
---
The new standard Records in Contexts supported by ICA is only a brick
in a larger transformation of our archival descriptions to RDF. It is
a question of a complete overhaul of our professional practises which
goes beyond the new standard itself. There exists a great potential
for enrichment and automation in the treatment of metadata in this
way, but the accompanying changes for teams (and the public) should
not be under-estimated. It would moreover not be honest to promise a
collision-free transition from one way of doing things to another.
SAPA is still in the process of working towards this changing of
practises. What is at stake is to succeed in making the most of the
opportunities offered by new technological advances whilst minimising
constraints.
In summary, three aspects seem to us fundamental to succeed in a
project for an adoption of RDF for an archival institution: to
assemble a collection of ontologies into a house ontology and publish
it in the form of OWL, to offer internal and public access to the
metadata via SPARQL endpoints, and to make use of a system of URIs for
descriptive articles which should be equally visible to the public.
These three aspects guarantee that the project has a truly healthy
foundation from a technical point of view. It remains then to
establish tools for administration and search built upon this
metadata. There are still immense challenges in this regard.
These challenges will only be solved if all our teams find their niche
in addressing them. That said, only the general engagement of our
professional community in this direction will enable us to get there.
We're counting therefore on you!
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Records_in_Contexts_users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Records_in_Context...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Records_in_Contexts_users/9b751bae-d32a-40e1-8226-6d01f99a58c0n%40googlegroups.com.
quick translation of just the conclusion section into English for some
colleagues, which I copy below. I hope that the translation is
reasonably accurate, but if I have mis-translated something, I would
be happy to be corrected; my French is somewhat rusty!
---
The new standard Records in Contexts supported by ICA is only a brick
in a larger transformation of our archival descriptions to RDF. It is
a question of a complete overhaul of our professional practises which
goes beyond the new standard itself. There exists a great potential
for enrichment and automation in the treatment of metadata in this
way, but the accompanying changes for teams (and the public) should
not be under-estimated. It would moreover not be honest to promise a
collision-free transition from one way of doing things to another.
SAPA is still in the process of working towards this changing of
practises. What is at stake is to succeed in making the most of the
opportunities offered by new technological advances whilst minimising
constraints.
In summary, three aspects seem to us fundamental to succeed in a
project for an adoption of RDF for an archival institution: to
assemble a collection of ontologies into a house ontology and publish
it in the form of OWL, to offer internal and public access to the
metadata via SPARQL endpoints, and to make use of a system of URIs for
descriptive articles which should be equally visible to the public.
These three aspects guarantee that the project has a truly healthy
foundation from a technical point of view. It remains then to
establish tools for administration and search built upon this
metadata. There are still immense challenges in this regard.
These challenges will only be solved if all our teams find their niche
in addressing them. That said, only the general engagement of our
professional community in this direction will enable us to get there.
We're counting therefore on you!
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Records_in_Contexts_users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Records_in_Context...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Records_in_Contexts_users/9b751bae-d32a-40e1-8226-6d01f99a58c0n%40googlegroups.com.
Baptiste de Coulon
Oct 27, 2023, 5:22:11 PM10/27/23
to Records_in_Contexts_users
Our Community is wunderfull!
With the quick help from Carlos Brito Freitez and Richard Williamson, we are able now to plan to publish the translation in Englich of the article at the beginning of the next Week ! Amazing.
Thanks to them!
We come back quick with the translated Text.
Best Regards
Baptiste
Carlos Brito
Oct 27, 2023, 5:22:11 PM10/27/23
to Records_in_C...@googlegroups.com
Dear Baptist,
Thank you for sharing, I will try to translate and provide the information to you, no need for any payment.
Best,
Carlos Brito Freitez
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 26, 2023, at 05:26, Baptiste de Coulon <baptiste...@sapa.swiss> wrote:
Dear all,
--
Richard Williamson
Oct 27, 2023, 5:22:11 PM10/27/23
to Records_in_C...@googlegroups.com
I translated a little more, from pages 7-8, including a couple of very
nice metaphors :-). It is great that the article includes this
paragraph on Record Resource vs Instantiation, which is a very
important aspect. More generally I have read more of the article now,
and it is very nice. As time permits, I may translate some more of it;
but let me know if somebody makes a more concerted effort to do so
:-).
---
The duality "Record Resource" vs "Instantiation". The standard
introduces a new fundamental concept, namely the distinction between
the description of the content of a document (Record Resource) and its
physical manifestation (Instantiation). It is a step which is not easy
to make to begin with for archivists, but which greatly facilitates
technical utilisation of the data thereafter. Initially the contents
of a document are described, and then the descriptions of its
different materialisations are attached to this initial description.
For example the analogue version of a document and its digital version
obtained by means of a digitalisation process constitute two different
instantiations of the same document. This multiplying of
materialisations might seem to complicate matters with regard to
particular analogue texts, but it is absolutely necessary for
digitally-born documents and in the case of digital copies of
documents in an unstable media (for example, audiovisual tracks). It
is still the case that the specific definition of the contents of a
Record Resource is a matter for each institution.
...
For archivists used to creating and reading descriptions of
collections of documents on a sheet of paper or more realistically in
a simple relational database where the appended information exists in
the form of text attached to the described entity, the image of
confetti is well-adapted (albeit one which maybe knocks one off
balance) to explain the implementation of RiC via RDF. By means of a
description in the form of a graph one assists in an atomisation of
information. Each piece of information appended to a description is a
separate entity, linked to the description of the collection of
documents via a property. The entities are not structurally organised
into a hierarchy. They are only so via the principal classes of the
ontology in use. In the end, it is as if one passed an old archival
description through a paper shredder out of which there comes only
little scraps of paper. Nonetheless, thanks to the graphs, that is to
say to the links between the little scraps of information, the sense
is not lost. Analysis leads one even to think that the sense is
enriched since the relations are likely more explicit than the old
types of description (Crupi, 2012).
nice metaphors :-). It is great that the article includes this
paragraph on Record Resource vs Instantiation, which is a very
important aspect. More generally I have read more of the article now,
and it is very nice. As time permits, I may translate some more of it;
but let me know if somebody makes a more concerted effort to do so
:-).
---
The duality "Record Resource" vs "Instantiation". The standard
introduces a new fundamental concept, namely the distinction between
the description of the content of a document (Record Resource) and its
physical manifestation (Instantiation). It is a step which is not easy
to make to begin with for archivists, but which greatly facilitates
technical utilisation of the data thereafter. Initially the contents
of a document are described, and then the descriptions of its
different materialisations are attached to this initial description.
For example the analogue version of a document and its digital version
obtained by means of a digitalisation process constitute two different
instantiations of the same document. This multiplying of
materialisations might seem to complicate matters with regard to
particular analogue texts, but it is absolutely necessary for
digitally-born documents and in the case of digital copies of
documents in an unstable media (for example, audiovisual tracks). It
is still the case that the specific definition of the contents of a
Record Resource is a matter for each institution.
...
For archivists used to creating and reading descriptions of
collections of documents on a sheet of paper or more realistically in
a simple relational database where the appended information exists in
the form of text attached to the described entity, the image of
confetti is well-adapted (albeit one which maybe knocks one off
balance) to explain the implementation of RiC via RDF. By means of a
description in the form of a graph one assists in an atomisation of
information. Each piece of information appended to a description is a
separate entity, linked to the description of the collection of
documents via a property. The entities are not structurally organised
into a hierarchy. They are only so via the principal classes of the
ontology in use. In the end, it is as if one passed an old archival
description through a paper shredder out of which there comes only
little scraps of paper. Nonetheless, thanks to the graphs, that is to
say to the links between the little scraps of information, the sense
is not lost. Analysis leads one even to think that the sense is
enriched since the relations are likely more explicit than the old
types of description (Crupi, 2012).
Baptiste de Coulon
Nov 7, 2023, 7:25:41 AM11/7/23
to Records_in_Contexts_users
Dear all,
As announced, the English translation of our article is now online : https://cloud.sapa.swiss/s/89zapoC57XKQCGF
Many thanks to Carlos, Richard and Roberta for their help!
Best Regards
Baptiste
Baptiste de Coulon | data archiviste | Présent lundi, jeudi et vendredi
Fondation SAPA | Schanzenstrasse 15, Postfach, CH-3001 Bern | 031 301 52 52
Hope, Aaron (MPBSD)
Nov 14, 2023, 6:00:52 PM11/14/23
to Records_in_C...@googlegroups.com
Hello everyone,
Just wondering if anyone has the link to attend the RiC study day online. I registered using the form, but have not received a link to join. Perhaps I missed something.
Thanks,
Aaron Hope
Baptiste de Coulon
Feb 29, 2024, 11:19:18 AMFeb 29
to Records_in_Contexts_users
Dear all,
Our article is now published (FR/EN) in no 24 of Revue électronique suisse en science de l'information (RESSI). : https://doi.org/10.55790/journals/ressi.2024.e1511
Thanks to all of you who help us to write it !
Best Regards
Baptiste
Siméon Boni
Feb 29, 2024, 12:17:23 PMFeb 29
to Records_in_C...@googlegroups.com
Super, bon travail à vous !
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Records_in_Contexts_users/8abb1ddb-98a1-4fe8-9940-a4d8f40c1d24n%40googlegroups.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages