Data fluidity in DARIAH -- pushing the agenda forward

This paper provides both an update concerning the setting up of the European DARIAH infrastructure and a series of strong action lines related to the development of a data centred strategy for the humanities in the coming years. In particular we tackle various aspect of data management: data hosting, the setting up of a DARIAH seal of approval, the establishment of a charter between cultural heritage institutions and scholars and finally a specific view on certification mechanisms for data

Unlocking the Digital Potential of Scholarly Monographs in 21st Century Research

Bargheer M, Dogan ZM, Horstmann W, Mertens M, Rapp A. Unlocking the Digital Potential of Scholarly Monographs in 21st Century Research. LIBER QUARTERLY. 2017;27(1):194-211

The Text Encoding Initiative as an Infrastructure

International audienc

Data Mining Technologies at the service of Open Knowledge

National audienceThe development of open access and open science principles has made it possible to have access to a wide variety of content online, which in turn can be seen as a wealth of reference information for further research. Information extraction and data mining technologies play an essential role in this respect and we present several projects and initiatives that have been carried out in the context of the EU infrastructure DARIAH as well as several national and European research projects. We will also identify the conditions for an adequate re-use of technologies and content, with involves standardisation, policies and training

Survey on researchers requirements and practices towards Cultural Heritage institutions: Documentation and analysis

Arts and Humanities research is mainly based on the analysis of " human traces "-such as artefacts, pieces of art, written documents, audio and video recordings, photographs, etc. – that are most of the time preserved by Cultural Heritage Institutions (or CHIs). To preserve, study and promote these objects, an increasing number of heterogeneous digital data is produced by CHIs, but also by Arts and Humanities scholars themselves. For instance, digital Cultural Heritage data include natively digital documents (like qualitative or quantitative datasets, digital photographs, transcriptions, etc.), digitized resources of all kind (such as scanned texts, digitized images or 3D models, etc.), but also attached metadata, annotation or further enrichments. In this regard, access to high quality Cultural Heritage data and metadata is essential to ensure high quality research in Arts and Humanities. Data sharing is indeed a key issue in the future development of Digital Humanities. According to this vision, enabling access to and promoting the reuse of Cultural Heritage data are thus crucial to create new collaboration and new research, facilitate the development of an open publishing environment for Arts and Humanities research, and reinforce the adoption of digital methods and workflows amongst researchers.However, in their relations with CHI, scholars seem always facing the same recurringproblem: « There is no generally valid rule as to how they can quote, duplicate andfurthermore republish in their scholarly work2 ». This situation is clearly a hindrance for bothCHIs and scholars, to develop new research on the one hand, and on the other to gainvisibility. It is now essential to tackle this issue by providing a clear and comprehensiveframework that enables interactions between CHIs and Arts and Humanities scholars

The risk of losing thick description: Data management challenges Arts and Humanities face in the evolving FAIR data ecosystem

In recent years, FAIR principles have come a long way to serve the global need for generic guidelines governing data management and stewardship. Considering their wide embrace and the support received from governments, policy-makers, governing bodies and funding bodies, FAIR principles have all the potential to have a huge impact on the future landscape of knowledge creation for the better. This opportunity, however, may easily be missed if the specific dynamics of scientific production are not addressed in its disciplinary implementation plans. With the goal of making FAIR meaningful and helping to realise its promises in an arts and humanities context, this paper describes some of the defining aspects underlying the domain-specific epistemic processes that pose hidden or visible challenges in the FAIRification of knowledge creation in Arts and Humanities. By applying the FAIR data guiding principles to arts and humanities data curation workflows, we will show that contrary to their general scope and deliberately domain-independent nature, they have been implicitly designed along underlying assumptions about how knowledge creation operates and communicates. These are: 1. scholarly data or metadata is digital by nature, 2. scholarly data is always created and therefore owned by researchers, and 3. there is a wide community-level agreement on what can be considered scholarly data. The problems around such assumptions in arts and humanities are cornerstones in reconciling disciplinary traditions with the productive implementation of FAIR data management. By addressing them one by one, we aim to contribute to the better understanding of discipline-specific needs and challenges in data production, discovery and reuse. Based on these considerations, we make recommendations that may facilitate the inclusive and optimal implementation of the high-level principles that serve the flourishing of the arts and humanities disciplines rather than imposing limitations on its epistemic practices

Co-creation dynamics in a European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC). The case of the DARIAH-ERIC Working Groups.

This PhD research studies the European Research Infrastructure Consortium (ERIC) and the research communities that take part in them. In particular, it examines the case study of the DARIAH-ERIC, the Research Infrastructure for the (digital) Arts and Humanities, and its Working Groups. These are communities of researchers gathered around similar research interests with the aim of providing concrete solutions to scholarly challenges. This research investigates collaborative practices taking place in the DARIAH Working Groups, by focussing on the epistemic and socio/political dynamics created by the interaction of practices and governance models proper of Research Infrastructures and Research Communities. Finally, this research asks, do Research Infrastructures encourage collaboration among researchers? In this research, I couple an institutional perspective - which has deeper roots in the field of Research Policy - with a research methodology (including ethnographic methods) originating in Science and Technology Studies and Philosophy of Science. Drawing on existing literature and empirical research, I identify the concept of co-creation as central in dynamics of knowledge creation in Research Infrastructures. Concluding, I argue that within Research Infrastructures, co-creation becomes societally and culturally relevant because of its crucial role in knowledge and technology transfer between stakeholders. As an example, the DARIAH Working Groups connect several actors, such as researchers, research managers, policymakers or citizens, from different disciplines and background, and provide an answer to concrete social or scholarly challenges

History of Philosophy and the Reflective Society

Make believe we are in 2028, attending the 26th World Congress of Philosophy, then the question is: how will philosophers delve into historic texts? Not on paper, but on devices. And each philosophical proposition uttered by any philosopher at any time will not stay on its own. It will instead be co-created by many others. The history of philosophy will be participative, thus contributing to the establishment of a reflective and inclusive society

3. Academic Publishing

International audienc