Post by Martin Doerr (24 August 2025)
Dear All,
Since a long time there has been silence about CRMdig.
D35 Area had extensively been used in applications and is an extended interpretation of METS Area, i.e., a concept and format to refer to contiguous parts of digital objects from the outside, i.e., without changing the object for entering highlights, as a target for annotations. It is essential for METS - CRM compatibility and working with visual scientific data, in particular in art conservation.
The problem in practice arose that such areas ("volumes") in 3D objects and others may appear and be annotated in 2D projections and vice-versa. This caused ambiguities of identity and reference. The logic has been published around 2012. Therefore the"propagation" links. In the original applications, the content model itself was in another system, therefore missing in CRMdig.
I have complemented the definitions now with the adequate content model, to make it selfcontained.
All changes are highlighted in yellow.
In the attached, examples are not updated.
I will continue reviewing the annotation model in CRMdig. it needs updating with CRMinf, may be to be moved there, as has been proposed in the past.
It is based on a copy from CRMdig 4.0
All the best,
Martin
Post by George Bruseker (24 August 2025)
Dear Martin,
I have a home work on the go and am actively consulting with Steve and Pavlos. It is following the last issues assigned. There was no space in the last sigs for dis because of sci and inf.
We can take a look at these suggestions as we work through the active home
work.
Best
George
Post by Athina Kritsotaki (27 August 2025)
Dear all,
In the context of Martin's new proposal, the current status on CRMdig and the new requirements from the ECHO project, I have some comments to add: 1)since we discuss again the concept of D9, perhaps we should add in the scope note a statement regarding the documentary (inherited by the E31) nature of D9, a characteristic that is not assigned to D1, for example. 2)In my opinion, L60 property is not necessary : it is already expressed as a property inherited to D9 . 3) We should also consider the "borndigital" objects (a requirement from ECHOES) and where they fit in the CRMdig. A "born digital" is the outcome of a E65 Creation and maybe of a case of D7 Digital Machine Event? And 4) a last question: it seems that the only relationship that exists between a physical thing and D1 is the P67 refers to (inherited), right? In the CRM base "P138 represents" implies a relationship also resulting from digitisation processes- see the text (however there is no such relationship in CRMdig expressing the appearance representation or form expressed by a digital image for example). Generally, I am happy to participate in the conversation about these things,
BRs,
Athina
Post by Martin Doerr (5 September 2025)
Dear All,
Here the full publications about CRMdig area and annotation.
Rodriguez-Echavarria, K., Theodoridou, M., Georgis, Ch., Arnold, D., Doerr, M., Stork , A., & Peña Serna, S. (2012). Semantically Rich 3D Documentation for the Preservation of Tangible Heritage <http://diglib.eg.org/handle/10.2312/VAST.VAST12.041-048>. /VAST12: The 13th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Intelligent Cultural Heritage, Brighton, UK, 2012. Proceedings/, (pp. 41-48). Eurographics Association (978-3-905674-39-2), (pdf <https://publications.ics.forth.gr/_publications/SemanticallyRich3Ddocum…;).
https://diglib.eg.org/items/85c4fc96-e3e3-49ec-ad4b-4881b468dcbf
Peña Serna, S., Scopigno, R., Doerr, M., Theodoridou, M., Georgis, Ch., Ponchio , F., & Stork , A. (2011). 3D-centered media linking and semantic enrichment through integrated searching, browsing, viewing and annotating <http://diglib.eg.org/handle/10.2312/VAST.VAST11.089-096>. /Proceedings of VAST11: The 12th International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Intelligent Cultural Heritage/, Prato, Italy, October 18-21, 2011. (pdf <https://publications.ics.forth.gr/_publications/3D-centered_media_linki…;).
https://diglib.eg.org/items/edf622fd-bfe0-4b6c-b07c-715cf3ea0c89
Best,
Martin
Post by Martin Doerr (23 September 2025)
Dear All,
See fig 1 in the this publication as an example of an area annotation:
https://vcg.isti.cnr.it/publication/2010/BBCCDDSS10/
"Documenting and Monitoring Small Fractures on Michelangelo’s David
Ute Dercks, Matteo Dellepiane, Massimiliano Corsini, Marco Callieri, Bernd Breuckmann, Christiane Bathow, Roberto Scopigno, Roberto Sigismondi
CAA 2010 Conference Proc. - January 2010"
https://vcgdata.isti.cnr.it/Publications/2010/BBCCDDSS10/CAA_2010_David…
Best,
Martin
Post by Rob Sanderson (24 September 2025)
With all due respect, for the same reason as using SKOS instead of narrower and broader, surely the Web Annotation Data Model should supercede the Annotation pattern in CRM Dig?
Rob
Post by Martin Doerr (24 September 2025)
Dear Robert,
Obviously the CRMdig Area construct and WADM Segment are overlapping and should be merged.
With respect to the Annotation class in CRMdig, compatibilities and scope should be discussed in detail. My current review of WADM does not indicate a simple superceding. I am looking forward to do this together with you after the next meeting.
All the best,
Martin
Post by Rob Sanderson (25 September 2025)
Hi Martin,
Yes, sounds good. Looking forward to discussing this in detail, as I anticipate that all the use cases will be easily covered :)
Rob