| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Börjesson, Lisa, 1985-, et al.
(författare)
-
The politics of paradata in documentation standards and recommendations for digital archaeological visualisations
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Digital Culture & Society. - Bielefeld : Transcript Verlag. - 2364-2114 .- 2364-2122. ; 6:2, s. 191-220
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Digitalisation of research data and massive e!orts to make it findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable has revealed that in addition to an eventual lack of description of the data itself (metadata), data reuse is often obstructed by the lack of information about the data- making and interpretation (i.e. paradata). In search of the extent and composition of categories for describing processes, this article reviews a selection of standards and recommendations frequently referred to as useful for documenting archaeological visualisations. It provides insight into 1) how current standards can be employed to document provenance and processing history (i.e. paradata), and 2) what aspects of the processing history can be made transparent using current stan- dards and which aspects are pushed back or hidden. The findings show that processes are often either completely absent or only partially addressed in the standards. However, instead of criticising standards for bias and omissions as if a perfect description of everything would be attainable, the findings point to the need for a comprehensive con- sideration of the space a standard is operating in (e.g. national heri- tage administration or international harmonisation of data). When a standard is used in a specific space it makes particular processes, methods, or tools transparent. Given these premises, if the standard helps to document what needs to be documented (e.g. paradata), and if it provides a type of transparency required in a certain space, it is reasonable to deem the standard good enough for that purpose.
|
|
| 3. |
- Huvila, Isto, Professor, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
Choreographies of Making Archaeological Data
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Open Archaeology. - : Walter de Gruyter. - 2300-6560. ; 7:1, s. 1602-1617
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A lot of different concepts have been utilised to elucidate diverse aspects of archaeological practices and knowledge production. This article describes how the notion of choreography can complement the existing repertoire of concepts and be used to render visible the otherwise difficult to grasp physical and mental movements that make up archaeological work as a practical and scholarly exercise. The conceptual discussion in the article uses vignettes drawn from an observation study of an archaeological teaching excavation in Scandinavia to illustrate how the concepts of choreography, choreographing, and choreographer can be used to inquire into archaeological work and data production. In addition to how explicating physical, temporal, and ontological choreographies of archaeological work can help to understand how it unfolds, the present article suggests that a better understanding of the epistemic choreographies of archaeological, scientific, and scholarly work can help to unpack and describe its inputs and outputs, the data it produces, what the work achieves, and how it is made in space and time.
|
|
| 4. |
- Huvila, Isto, Professor, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
Documenting information making in archaeological field reports
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Documentation. - : Emerald Group Publishing Limited. - 0022-0418 .- 1758-7379. ; 77:5, s. 1107-1127
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PurposeSharing information about work processes has proven to be difficult. This applies especially to information shared from those who participate in a process to those who remain outsiders. The purpose of this article is to increase understanding of how professionals document their work practices with a focus on information making by analysing how archaeologists document their information work in archaeological reports.Design/methodology/approachIn total 47 Swedish archaeological reports published in 2018 were analysed using close reading and constant comparative categorisation.FindingsEven if explicit narratives of methods and work process have particular significance as documentation of information making, the evidence of information making is spread out all over the report document in (1) procedural narratives, (2) descriptions of methods and tools, (3) actors and actants, (4) photographs, (5) information sources, (6) diagrams and drawings and (7) outcomes. The usability of reports as conveyors of information on information making depends more on how a forthcoming reader can live with it as a whole rather than how to learn of the details it recites.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is based on a limited number of documents representing one country and one scholarly and professional field.Practical implicationsIncreased focus on the internal coherence of documentation and the complementarity of different types of descriptions could improve information sharing. Further, descriptions of concepts that refer to work activities and the situation when information came into being could similarly improve their usability.Originality/valueThere is little earlier research on how professionals and academics document and describe their information activities.
|
|
| 5. |
- Huvila, Isto, Professor, 1976-, et al.
(författare)
-
Documenting Information Processes and Practices : Paradata, Provenance Metadata, Life-Cycles and Pipelines
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. - : Wiley. - 2373-9231. ; 58:1, s. 604-609
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Processes and practices–and in general, informational doings and their diverse constellations–are pertinent elements of the information landscape. This panel presents research on documentation and description of processes and practices in the information field addressing: 1) how different conceptualisations of processes and practices influence how they emerge as describable entities; 2) what different approaches to document and describe processes and practices exist and have been proposed in information science and technology research; 3) what aspects of processes and practices different documentation approaches capture, make visible and invisible; and 4) what novel insights from the current state-of-the-art research can be drawn to support practitioners in different areas of the information field, including knowledge organisation, information management, information literacy instruction, and development of information systems and services.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
