Title:
Year:
Abstract:
Annotations played a major role in Classics since the very beginning of the discipline. Some of the first attested examples of philological work, the so-called scholia, were in fact marginalia, namely comments written at the margins of a text. Over the centuries this kind of scholarship evolved until it became a genre on its own, the classical commentary, thus moving away from the text with the result that philologists had to devise a solution to linking together the commented and the commenting text. The solution to this problem is the system of canonical citations, a special kind of bibliographic references that are at the same time very precise and interoperable.
In this paper we present HuCit, an ontology which mod- els in depth the semantics of canonical citations. Its main goal is to underpin a Knowledge Base providing the information that an automatic expert system requires in order to read and interpret correctly this type of citations. Finally, we describe how HuCit can be combined together with the OAC ontology to publish in a semantic format a specific kind of machine-generated annotations, that is annotations concerning the canonical citations contained in secondary sources (e.g. journal articles, commentaries, etc.).
Full reference:
2013
New Technologies in Medieval and Renaissance Studies, (forthcoming). (part of the 'Envisioning REED in the Digital Age' collection)
paper Citations and Annotations in Classics: Old Problems and New Perspectives
Collaborative Annotation in Shared Environments: Metadata, vocabularies and techniques in the Digital Humanities (workshop co-located with ACM DocEng 2013 Conference), Florence, Sep 2013.
2011
paper An Ontological View of Canonical Citations
Digital Humanities 2011 , Stanford, USA, Jun 2011.
2010
paper Data integration perspectives from the London Theatres Bibliography project
Annual Conference of the Canadian Society for Digital Humanities / Société pour l'étude des médias interactifs (SDH-SEMI 2010), Montreal, Canada, Jun 2010.