Linked Open Usable Data for Cultural Heritage · Chapter 10

10. Conclusion

For a better understanding of the past,
Our images have to be enhanced,
A new dialogue in three dimensions,
Must have openness at its heart,
For somewhere within the archive
Of our aggregated minds
Are a multitude of questions
And a multitude of answers,
Simply awaiting to be found.
(Mr Gee, 2023)

This chapter brings to a close the journey undertaken since February 2021, aiming to clearly articulate the answers to the research questions, discuss how the research aligns with the objectives, elucidate the significance of the work, outline its shortcomings, and suggest avenues for future research.

I had the privilege of hearing the above poem at EuropeanaTech in The Hague in October 2023. What struck me most, and what I have tried to convey in this thesis, was the powerful dialogue and collective spirit striving to harness the potential of our (digital) heritage. With a sense of conviction after this conference, I approached the next one in Geneva in February 2024 with confidence, believing that I had made a compelling case for the concept of LOUD. When a participant asked how LOUD differed from Linked Data, however, I found myself explaining the socio-technical ethos of IIIF and Linked Art, the richness of the individuals who make them up, the ability to combine these different standards, and the common use cases that emerge from these collaborations. Whether my answer was convincing remains uncertain, but I knew it was too brief. Perhaps it is here, in this conclusion, that my thoughts can find their full expression.

I believe that LOUD should be at the forefront of efforts to improve the accessibility and usability of CH data, an endeavour that is increasingly relevant in a web-centric environment. This paradigm has gained considerable traction, particularly with the advent of Linked Art and the recognition that the IIIF Presentation API has been an inspiration for the LOUD design principles. The development and maintenance of LOUD standards by dedicated communities are characterised by collaboration, consensus building, and transparency. In the interstices of the IIIF and Linked Art communities, frameworks for interoperability are not only exposed, but revealed as profound testaments to the power of transparent collaboration across institutional boundaries. Both communities, it is true, are still very much Anglo-Saxon efforts, where the specifications have mainly been implemented in GLAM and/or DH research projects, or at least when we have been aware of them. It has clear guidelines on how to propose use cases, mostly using GitHub, and hides the sometimes unnecessary RDF complexity behind a set of JSON-LD @context. IIIF is at the presentation layer and can really play its role as a mediator, with the Manifest as its central unit connecting other specifications, including semantic metadata, and preferably with simpatico specifications such as Linked Art.

An important hypothesis arises from the observation that adherence to the LOUD design principles makes specifications more likely to be adopted. The primary benefit of adopting LOUD standards lies in their grassroots nature. This grassroots approach not only aligns with the core values of openness and collaboration within the DH community but also serves as a common denominator between DH practitioners and CHIs. This unique alignment fosters a sense of shared purpose and common ground. However, it’s essential to acknowledge that while LOUD and its associated standards, including IIIF, hold immense promise, their limited recognition in the wider socio-technical ecosystem may currently hinder their full potential impact beyond the CH domain.

Consideration of socio-technical requirements and the promotion of digital equity are essential to the development of specifications in line with the LOUD design principles. In the context of the IIIF and Linked Art communities, this means both recognising current challenges and building on existing practices. This includes forming alliances that support diverse forms of inclusion at both project and individual levels. For example, organisations should be encouraged to send representatives from diverse professional and personal backgrounds, such as underrepresented groups or non-technical fields. This can be facilitated by initiatives that lower the barriers to participation, such as financial support for travel and participation, flexible participation formats, and targeted outreach efforts. Furthermore, as these standards often align with open government data initiatives, they present opportunities for broader public engagement and institutional transparency.

In the broader context of DH, understanding LOUD involves tracing the historical development of the field and its evolving relationship with technology. The interdisciplinary nature of DH has always integrated diverse scholarly and technical practices. In recent years, DH has seen a notable increase in interest in the use of Linked Data and semantic technologies to improve the discoverability and accessibility of CH collections. LOUD’s emphasis on user-centred design and usability aligns well with these goals. Consequently, the principles of LOUD hold great promise for advancing the integration and use of community-driven APIs and/or Linked Data within DH. This can be seen within PIA, where the benefits of implementing IIIF helped us to streamline machine-generated annotations, integrate different thumbnails into GUI prototypes, model photo albums with different layers from the Kreis Family collection, and enable project members and students to engage in digital storytelling, an important participatory facet that can be seamlessly explored by DH efforts and CHIs with the help of the IIIF Image and Presentation APIs. Data reuse is definitely a key LOUD driver, which could have been done more extensively with a productive instance of Linked Art. As for widening participation, this is definitely a strategic and political decision, rather than a technical one. That said, LOUD specifications can definitely be embedded through strategic citizen science initiatives.

A recent example that highlights the comprehensive value of Linked Data was presented by Newbury (2024) at the CNI Spring 2024 Meeting. He delineated its significance as extending well beyond single entities, such as the Getty Research Institute, to enrich a vast ecosystem. Specifically, he identified three principal areas of value: Firstly, within the ecosystem itself, where the utility of information is amplified through its application in diverse contexts. Secondly, for the audience, by directly addressing user needs and facilitating various conceptual frameworks. And finally, within the community, by enabling wider use and adaptation of data and code. This approach to Linked Data, as articulated by Newbury, not only enhances its utility across these dimensions, but also aligns seamlessly with the LOUD proposition, underscoring a shared vision for a digital space where the interconnectedness and accessibility of (meta)data serve as foundational principles for progress and community engagement.

LUX, as a catalyst for LOUD, exemplifies a practical approach to implementing Linked Data that has garnered significant local engagement and support at Yale. This initiative demonstrates how sound socio-technical practices can be effectively applied within a supportive institutional environment. The consistency of the data within LUX aligns well with IIIF and Linked Art standards, with only a few minor adjustments required for full compliance. These quick fixes are manageable and do not detract from the overall robustness of the initiative. While it may be too early to fully assess the wider impact of using LOUD specifications on the LUX platform within the CH domain, the initiative has already attracted considerable interest in recent months. This growing attention suggests that the LUX approach is resonating with other organisations, suggesting the potential for wider adoption and impact. The enthusiastic local engagement at Yale provides a strong foundation for LUX and highlights its potential to serve as a model for similar projects aimed at enriching digital heritage through effective collaboration and agreed-upon standards.

In carrying out this thesis, I have adhered to the five main objectives set out at the beginning of the PhD. These objectives have been accomplished to a high degree, reflecting a substantial and well-executed project. Furthermore, most of the outputs – such as data models and scripts – from this work are available on GitHub, providing open access to the wider community. In addition, I have published several papers, both individually and collaboratively, further disseminating the findings and contributions of this research.

Additionally, this thesis is relevant because it sheds light on communities and implementations that can be celebrated not only for their standards but also for their operating ethos; IIIF and Linked Art present models ripe for emulation beyond their immediate digital confines. Here, agency and authority are most typically granted to the collective over the isolated, with each actor - be it an individual, an institution or an interface – intricately interconnected. Yale’s LUX initiative also embodies this ethos, demonstrating how collaborative efforts can lead to innovative solutions and wider impact. It is to be hoped, then, that these practices of openness and multiple partnerships will not be seen as limited to their origins in digital representation. At the very least, I hope that these socio-technical approaches can serve as exemplars or sources of inspiration in broader arenas, where the principles of mutual visibility and concerted action can point the way towards cohesive and adaptive collaborative architectures.

Despite its contribution, this thesis is far from perfect and certainly contains several shortcomings. I will name here three significant ones. First, the visualisations included and the use of FOL are primarily designed to support my own self-reflection and may be more beneficial to me than to the broader academic community. While they provide insights into my research process and findings, their applicability and usefulness to others might be limited. Second, the theoretical framework I employed, while instrumental to my research, may not serve as a universally applicable toolbox. Nevertheless, I urge readers to pay close attention to STS methodologies and practices. The works of Bruno Latour, Donna Haraway, and Susan Leigh Star have been invaluable companions throughout this dissertation. Additionally, for those involved in conceptualising semantic information, I recommend exploring Floridi’s PI, which offers profound insights into the nature and dynamics of information. These readings have greatly influenced my approach and understanding, and I believe they can offer valuable perspectives to others as well. Third, while the thesis aims to address both community practices and semantic interoperability, it leans more heavily towards the former. This emphasis on community practices may overshadow the broader discussion of semantic interoperability, potentially limiting the appeal of the thesis to those primarily interested in the technical aspects.

Other shortcomings include the broad scope of the thesis, with three empirical chapters exploring different avenues. While this comprehensive approach provides a broad understanding of the research topic, it has also resulted in a rather lengthy thesis. This may be a challenge for the reader, as a topic of interest in one chapter may not be as compelling in another. The diversity of empirical focus, while enriching the research, may dilute the coherence for some readers, making it more difficult to maintain a consistent engagement throughout the dissertation. Despite these limitations, I hope that the different perspectives and findings contribute to a richer, more nuanced understanding of LOUD for CH.

Avenues for future research are numerous and promising. One interesting area to explore is the comparative benefits experienced by early adopters of IIIF and Linked Art specifications versus those who implemented these standards later. Early adopters have the advantage of having their use cases discussed and resolved within the community, and it would be insightful to analyse the long-term impacts on their projects. Such a study is already feasible for early adopters of IIIF and will become possible to compare further implementations of Linked Art within a few years. Furthermore, future exploration could focus on the full implementation of Linked Art within PIA or similar efforts, as well as more performance-oriented testing with the deployed LOUD APIs. These efforts should further validate the robustness and scalability of these specifications. Another important area for future investigation is the participation of institutions and individuals from the Global South^[400] diverse regions beyond North America and Western Europe^[403] in both the IIIF and Linked Art communities. It is crucial to explore how we can better support their uptake of these specifications and encourage their active involvement in these initiatives to ensure a more inclusive and globally representative environment.

As I reflect on the journey of this thesis, I am reminded of the powerful dialogue and collective effort that has been at its heart. Mr Gee’s poem resonates deeply with my own aspirations for this work: to enhance our understanding of the past through openness and collaboration, as can be seen in IIIF and Linked Art. As I bring this dissertation to a close, I am filled with a sense of accomplishment and a renewed commitment to promoting sound socio-technical practices. It is my hope that the insights and methodologies presented here will inspire others to engage in this ongoing dialogue, continually asking and answering the many questions that arise as we collectively explore our cultural heritage landscapes.