emblematica overview dlf

Open Annotation Collaboration phase II DLF Forum 2012 – 4-5 November 2012, Denver, CO

Annotation of Digital Emblematica

Jacob Jett ([email protected])

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

CIRSCIRSSS

Center for Informatics Research in Science and ScholarshipGraduate School of Library and Information ScienceUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

http://www.OpenAnnotation.org

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.openannotation.org/

Project Context

Open Annotation Collaboration http://www.OpenAnnotation.org/2

DLF Forum 2012 – 4-5 November 2012, Denver, CO

• Started as a collaborative digitization project partnering:• University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaig and• Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel.

• Resulted in the creation of the Emblematica Online Virtual Collection.

• Provides emblem scholars access to about 700 digitized emblem books and over 18,000 fully described emblems.

• Desire by emblem scholars for web-based, dynamic methods of interacting with the emblems is driving the development of digital tools, including digital annotation tools.


Emblematica Corpus

Motto

Pictura

Subscriptio

Peter Isselburg, Emblemata Politica, 1617

3

Emblem Books: An Early Modern

literary genre using text & images

Open Annotation Collaboration http://www.OpenAnnotation.org/

Emblem Scholar Annotation Use Cases



• Generally for note-taking and sharing

• But also examples of more sophisticated annotation & discourse needs.

• Three key examples of sophisticated annotations:

• Comparison of emblems and/or emblem elements (visual juxtaposition of digital resources) – Annotation of a composite set of targets,

• Annotation of emblem or emblem elements within their context – Preservation of annotation contextual elements and

• Annotations supporting scholarly discourse – Layering of annotations.

Example 1: Comparison of Emblems and/or Emblem Elements



Pope holding a mitre over a suppliant (Valvasor)

Pope blessing a suppliant (Sporck)

Example 1: Annotation of composite set of targets



Example 1:Expressed as triples in turtle



<http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.3.1> a oa:Annotation ;

oa:hasBody <urn:uuid:45620d10> ;oa:hasTarget <urn:uuid:0938rjf1> .

<urn:uuid:0938rjf1> a oa:Set ;oa:item <urn:uuid:54c2a25d> ;oa:item <urn:uuid:f48c0020> .

<urn:uuid:45620d10> a cnt:ContentAsText ;

cnt:chars "These picturae depict the Pope fulfilling different roles...." ;

cnt:characterEncoding "utf-8" . <urn:uuid:54c2a25d> a oa:SpecificResource ;

oa:hasSource <http://hdl.handle.net/10111/EmblemRegistry:E010287> ;

oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid:0a964cff> ;oa:hasState <urn:uuid:d1774afa> .

<urn:uuid:0a964cff> a oa:FragmentSelector;

rdf:value "xywh=pixel: 1044,2852,468,280" .

< urn:uuid:f48c0020> a oa:SpecificResource ;oa:hasSource

<http://hdl.handle.net/10111/EmblemRegistry:E010066> ;oa:hasSelector < urn:uuid:75e455f0> ;oa:hasState <urn:uuid:d1774afa> .

< urn:uuid:75e455f0> a oa:FragmentSelector;

rdf:value "xywh=pixel: 1452,508,588,404" . < urn:uuid:d1774afa> a oax:HttpRequestState;

rdf:value “Accept: image/jpeg" .

Example 1:Important issues – URIs for annotation targets

• One best practices issue is how best to select the URIs of the targets of an annotation.– Can use urls, such as those provided by services like djatoka, e.g.,

http://djatoka.grainger.illinois.edu/adore-djatoka/resolver?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_id=http://emblemimages.grainger.illinois.edu/theatrummortishu00valv/JP2processed/theatrummortishu00valv_0032-0033.jp2&svc_id=info:lanl-repo/svc/getRegion&svc_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:jpeg2000&svc.format=image/jpeg&svc.level=5&svc.rotate=0&svc.region=576,2472,1560,1320,

– Can use media fragment identifiers (but this W3C standard doesn’t seem to be well supported) or

– Can use a source uri plus a selector (as shown in the example)

• But, which of these actually help to co-locate annotations of the emblems?

– Preliminary consensus is that separating the selector (i.e. the fragment) from the source URI is the best approach in most cases.



Example 2:Annotation of an Emblem within a Context



Example 2:Preservation of contextual elements



Example 2:Expressed as triples in turtle



<http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.1.7> a oa:Annotation ; oa:hasBody <urn:uuid:3984hf0> ; oa:hasTarget <urn:uuid:0938nrg9> .

<urn:uuid:3984hf0> a cnt:ContentAsText ; cnt:characterEncoding "utf-8" ; cnt:chars "This example of Otto van Veen's work..." .

<urn:uuid:0938nrg9> a oa:SpecificResource ; oa:hasSource <http://emblemimages.grainger.illinois.edu/ladoctrinedesmoe00veen/JP2Processed/ladoctrinedesmoe00veen_0050-0051.jp2> ; oa:hasState <urn:uuid9538tj00> ; oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid8745tj04> ; oax:hasScope <http://libsysdigi.library.uiuc.edu/OCA/Books2010-01/ladoctrinedesmoe00veen/ladoctrinedesmoe00veen.pdf> .

<urn:uuid:9538tj00> a oax:HttpRequestState ; rdf:value “Accept: image/jpeg" .

<urn:uuid:8745tj04> a oa:FragmentSelector ; rdf:value "xywh=pixel: 360,2552,2208,1712" .

Example 2:Important issues – preservation of annotation scope



• Preserving the scope of an annotation is important for several reasons:

• Allows annotations to be associated with larger bodies of resources (e.g., an annotated emblem is one of many in a book of emblems),

• Allows annotations to be collocated in multiple ways (e.g., can search for annotations by specific book rather than just specific emblem),

• Preserves the meaning of annotations that are context sensitive;for example, a symbol may have a different meaning depending on the textual elements of an emblem.

Example 3:Supporting scholarly discourse



The upper pictura influenced the lower pictura.

I don’t agree. Both picturae were prob-ably influenced by a common antecedent.

Example 3:Layering annotations



Annotation by Scholar 1

Example 3:Scholar 1’s annotation expressed as triples in turtle



<http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.4.4> a oa:Annotation ; oa:hasBody <urn:uuid:38745g75> ; oa:hasTarget <urn:uuid:09875t002 .

<urn:uuid:38745g75> a cnt:ContentAsText ; cnt:chars "The upper pictura..." ; cnt:characterEncoding "utf-8" .

<urn:uuid:09875t002> a oa:Set ; oa:item <urn:uuid:64awrtg683> ; oa:item <urn:uuid:6981616wb6> .

<urn:uuid:64awrtg6843> a oa:SpecificResource ; oa:hasSource <http://www.emblems.arts.gla.ac.uk/french/facsimile.php?id=sm535-p08> ; oa:hasState <urn:uuid:3614849dd> ; oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid:362842er6y6> .

<urn:uuid:6981616wb6> a oa:SpecificResource ; oa:hasSource <http://hdl.handle.net/10111/EmblemRegistry:E000977> ; oa:hasState <urn:uuid:3614849dd> ; oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid:79313c8ds9> .

<urn:uuid:3614849dd> a oax:HttpRequestState ; rdf:value “Accept: image/jpeg" .

<urn:uuid:362842er6y6> a oa:FragmentSelector ; rdf:value “xywh=pixel: 345,465,582,391” .

<urn:uuid:79313c8ds9> a oa:FragmentSelector ; rdf:value "xywh=pixel: 624,0,1452,1988" .

Example 3:Layering Annotations



Annotation by Scholar 2

Example 3:Scholar 2’s annotation expressed as triples in turtle



<http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.4.5> a oa:Annotation ; oa:hasBody <urn:uuid:34589s22> ; oa:hasTarget <urn:uuid3645sdzgb6> .

<urn:uuid:34589s22> a cnt:ContentAsText ; cnt:characterEncoding "utf-8" ; cnt:chars: "I don't agree Both..." .

<urn:uuid:3645sdzgb6> a oa:Set ; oa:item <urn:uuid:46948dr3> ; oa:item <http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.4.4> .

<urn:uuid:46948dr3> a oa:SpecificResource ; oa:hasSource <http://archive.org/stream/aesopiphrygisfab00offi#page/240/mode/2up> ; oa:hasSelector <urn:uuid:676474erg6e> .

<urn:uuid:676474erg6e> a oa:FragmentSelector ; rdf:value "xywh=pixel: 1250,422,678,431" .

<http://myUniversity.edu/myWeb/Anno4.4.4> a oa:Annotation ;… [See Slide 13]

Example 3:Important issues – Separation of body and annotation



• Why have separate identities for annotation and annotation content?

• Allows for preserving the identity of the relationship of the annotation body to the annotation target.

• Makes the relationship into a distinct web resource with its own set of properties.

• Annotation data modeling issues are not black and white. There are frequently multiple ways to model an annotation.

• Emblem scholars are sensitive to target granularity but less so to body granularity (e.g., they have a strong desire to annotate something specific but the annotation content frequently conflates multiple motivations and types)

• How will these nuances be leveraged?

emblematica overview dlf

Technology

annotation oa

annotation of emblem

open annotation collaboration4

annotation targets

digital annotation

hassource oa

specificresource oa

hasstate oa