|
ArchaeoML represents a powerful model for information sharing and analysis of cultural heritage materials. ArchaeoML is the conceptual backbone of the OCHRE project (formerly XSTAR), a University of Chicago initiative led by David Schloen. XSTAR is specifically designed to both maximize transparency in the process of knowledge construction, and to embrace the diversity of an ever evolving discipline.
- ArchaeoML is author-centered. The user interface enables researchers to author original data, or import legacy data into the XSTAR system. It does not limit theoretical or methodological choices. It enables all to share, cite, and evaluate primary data, queries, and syntheses. Users can create and share standards and common recording systems. XSTAR supports multiple standards that evolve "organically" as the discipline advances.
- ArchaeoML is widely applicable . ArchaeoML describes a series of recursive data structures that link observational items and their descriptive properties in networks of containment, linking relationships, etc. Because these data structures are so highly generalized and abstracted, they can be applied for a wide diversity of source data.
- ArchaeoML is open. The technologies are open and can be implemented for noncommercial uses by anyone, anywhere. This enables distributed information preservation and sharing. The AAI actively encourages hosting and serving of ArchaeoML- systems.
- ArchaeoML meets research needs. It enables both highly specific searches and database querying capabilities. These are key features for both exploratory research and sophisticated analyses.
- ArchaeoML integrates media. Multimedia (images, sound, video) and other data types (GIS, 3D point clouds, etc.) can be explored along with text and numerical data. This enhances the searchability and usability of these different media.
- ArchaeoML enables syntheses. Mapping meaning across different project data sets is often a contestable process. XSTAR enables users to author, share, critique and modify data integration mappings, but no mapping is treated as definitive. Others can use, critique, abandon, modify, and expand on mappings, all within the context of scholarly debate.
|