Objects As Information Carriers

Identifying Challenges – Cataloguing Recommendations Therefore, one of the initial questions addressed is how the relationship between textual information as expressed in text, letters and signs and material design is represented in existing data collections and databases (fig. 1). The aim is to collect a catalogue of criteria in a TWG on how relevant material object properties can be made available appropriately for the research process. An online workshop on October 22 will provide a platform for experts from various fields to share their insights on the topic. The results will be consolidated on a conference planned for Spring 2025. Research Data Life Cycle and Object Biography Text-bearing objects typically also generate specific data about their object biography either by repurpose for use in new function (fig. 1) or by reor continuous use as a palimpsest. The latter is impressively illustrated by the late 16th century glass tankard, which is inscribed with 106 mostly dated inscriptions from "users" spanning the period between 1580 and 1587 (fig. 2). These inscriptions are incised on all sides of the vessel, both randomly and in deliberate reference to each other. From the resulting complex network of surrounding inscriptions, the altering design of the vessel over time can be revealed – but its adequate modelling remains problematic. Modelling the, not rarely complex, object history of written artefacts thus seems to be an issue for which the resolving requirements are yet to be defined. It is aimed to establish a corresponding TWG in close cooperation with working bodies of N4O such as the N4O Objects Ontology and Minimal Metadata-Set TWG and the TWG 3D Annotation. Scope Objects bearing Inscriptions generate a multiplicity of research data. To the objects’ data itself adds the information from the inscriptions which can be applied in different time periods of the objects’ biographies using varying techniques and materials. These involve plentiful facts about the artefacts’ background such as names, places, and their functions in (various) past societies. Whereas this written information by itself can be mapped using authority files and thesauri, the relation established between the objects’ material design and its inscription(s) produces research questions and approaches which pose much more challenging tasks for modelling. References C. Klose, U. Ehmig & B. Weisser. (2024). NFDI4Objects – Community Cluster "Objects as Information Carriers". Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10686632 T. Meier, M.R. Ott, & R. Sauer, eds. (2015). Materiale Textkulturen: Konzepte – Materialien – Praktiken, Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110371291 N. Dietrich, L. Lieb, & N. Schneidereit, eds (2023). Theorie und Systematik materialer Textkulturen: Abschlussband des SFB 933, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111292229 G. Bodard, H. Cayless, C. Cenati, et al. (2021). Modeling Epigraphy with an Ontology (0.1). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4639508 S. E. Bond, P. Dilley & R. Horne, eds. (2021). Linked Open Data for the Ancient Mediterranean: Structures, Practices, Prospects. ISAW Papers 20. http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/20/ J. Jünger et al. (2023). Epigraf, A research platform for the collection, annotation and publication of text data https://epigraphy.info/documents/workshop_7/POSTER_JUENGER.pdf C. Klose (2024). Community Cluster: “Objects as Information Carriers”. https://epigraphy.info/workshop_8_posters/#poster9 About us and how to Participate The cluster hosts space for researchers, experts and institutions of all fields and periods working with written artefacts who see the need to make the materiality of all kinds of inscribed or written artefacts adequately accessible and researchable in the digital research environment. The material aspect of written artefacts has become more important ever since the material turn, which has shifted the focus to the objects’ design, their use and their placement in (past) societies. Co-Chairs of the Community Cluster Ulrike Ehmig (BBAW/CIL) Managing Director of the CIL Research Centre [email protected] Bernhard Weisser (SMB-SPK/Münzkabinett) Director Münzkabinett Berlin [email protected] Organisation / Contact Christoph Klose (SMB-SPK/Münzkabinett) [email protected] DFN Mailinglist Rocket Chat Channel Open Science Framework Fig. 2: Late 16th glass Tankard with 106 inscriptions. Schloss Neuenstein, Deutsche Inschriften (DI) 73 (Hohenlohekreis) Nr. 394 Figure and Transcription as in DI 73 and data snippet in Epidoc TEI using Epigraf - highlighting three historical ‘users’ of the object. user #72: AD 1584 Velten von und zu der Hess user #26: AD 1581 Gunter von Bunau user #6: AD 1580 Velten Heinrich von Elershausen Fig. 1: Material properties of the re-used inscription AE 2004, 1174 as represented in various databases: EDCS 47300116, LUPA 5209, EDH 031972 Zitation C. Klose et al. (2024), Objects as Information Carriers. Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.13798731 About the Poster: NFDI4Objects Community Meeting 2024, Mainz. Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz (SPK) Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (BBAW) Community Cluster Objects as Information Carriers Objekte als Inschriftenträger Bibliographie: ●Bibby, David et al. (2022). Digitales Forschungsdatenmanagement in der Archäologie und die Initiative NFDI4Objects. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5823868 ●... About the Poster: NFDI4Objects Community Meeting 2024, Mainz. Zitation: Vorgeschlagene Zitation für Poster inkl. doi und QR-Code auf Datei im Repository Ulrike Ehmig (Chair) BBAW/CIL Bernhard Weisser (Chair) SMB/MK Christoph Klose SMB/MK Fig. 1: Late 16th glass Tankard with 106 inscriptions. Schloss Neuenstein, DI 73 (Hohenlohekreis) Nr. 394 Figure and Transcription as in DI 37 and data snippet in Epidoc TEi using Epigraf ??? Fig. 1: Late 16th glass Tankard with 106 inscriptions. Schloss Neuenstein, DI 73 (Hohenlohekreis) Nr. 394 Figure and Transcription as in DI 37 and data snippet in Epidoc TEi using Epigraf ???