add some more

src/thesis.md

@@ -291,18 +291,44 @@ Efforts to interlink {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data have brought about significan
 
 Finding this equilibrium becomes crucial as {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data continues to grow in complexity and size, necessitating the seamless integration of native web technologies. The {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }} concept cultivates an environment that encourages the formation of vibrant {{ "CoP" | abbr | safe }} and the seamless integration of native web technologies, wherein an essential principle is the availability of comprehensive documentation supplemented with practical examples [@raemy_ameliorer_2022]. Moreover, the emphasis on leveraging widely adopted technologies enhances the interoperability of data and promotes its wider dissemination. With {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }} principles guiding the linking of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data, the resulting web of knowledge becomes more than just a machine-readable resource; it transforms into a user-centric ecosystem where both accessibility of Linked Data and usability intersect to enable scholars and a wider audience to engage in the exploration and appreciation of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} [@newbury_loud_2018]. Finally, by fostering a collaborative, knowledge-sharing mindset, {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }} empowers software developers to implement data in a robust way, drawing insights from shared experiences [see @page_linked_2020].
 
-In this chapter, which serves as the literature review of the PhD thesis, I attempt to draw on this brief introduction by dividing the insights into seven sections in order to provide an overview of the key concepts related to interlinking data in the {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} domain. The literature review primarily encompasses works published up until December 2023, providing a comprehensive snapshot of the field's current state and its evolution. ?????? discusses what makes {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data stand out and is about {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} metadata standards, while ?????? explores the technological trends, scientific movements and guiding principles that have shaped the field. ?????? provides an overview of the web as an open platform, which are essential to understanding the current landscape of interlinking {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data. ?????? focuses on {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }}, while ?????? looks at characterising the community practices and semantic interoperability dimensions for {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}. Finally, in ??????, I summarise key elements from each section and within each of these I give some initial thoughts with respect to {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }}, and then conclude the chapter with some considerations on why we as a society need to care about {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data.
+In this chapter, which serves as the literature review of the PhD thesis, I attempt to draw on this brief introduction by dividing the insights into seven sections in order to provide an overview of the key concepts related to interlinking data in the {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} domain. The literature review primarily encompasses works published up until December 2023, providing a comprehensive snapshot of the field's current state and its evolution. [Section 3.1](#sec:standout) discusses what makes {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data stand out and is about {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} metadata standards, while ?????? explores the technological trends, scientific movements and guiding principles that have shaped the field. ?????? provides an overview of the web as an open platform, which are essential to understanding the current landscape of interlinking {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data. ?????? focuses on {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }}, while ?????? looks at characterising the community practices and semantic interoperability dimensions for {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}. Finally, in ??????, I summarise key elements from each section and within each of these I give some initial thoughts with respect to {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }}, and then conclude the chapter with some considerations on why we as a society need to care about {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data.
 
 ### 3.1 What Makes Cultural Heritage Data Stand Out? {id="sec:standout"} 
 
 Here, I aim to establish the indirect territory of my study, as I am situated on a distinct plane that focuses on web technologies and standards --- as well as software and services that enable them --- as the subjects of investigation. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }} specifications owe their existence to the available data that have served as case studies. Thus, their significance can be best understood through the lens of data and I recognise here the pivotal role played by {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} practitioners --- encompassing individuals from research and memory institutions --- who have had a significant impact on specifying a series of web-based standards and who have helped to move forward the discovery of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data and beyond, in particular those belonging to the public domain, in an open manner.
 
-(...)
+In [Subsection 3.1.1](#subsec:cultural-heritage), I provide an introduction to {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} as recognised by the {{ "UNESCO" | abbr | safe }}. I explore the tangible, intangible, and natural dimensions of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}, laying the foundation for further discussions on its representation and preservation, notably by giving a first definition of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data. Next in ??????, I look at the challenges of representation and embodiment of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data. This subsection examines the challenges in describing and preserving its materiality or embodied aspects. Understanding the significance of collective efforts, communities, and the interplay of technologies. Thirdly, I discuss what I called in ?????? where I highlight how actors in terms of collaborative actions and apparatuses play a pivotal role in {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}.
+
+#### 3.1.1 Cultural Heritage {id="subsec:cultural-heritage"}
+
+The legacy of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} encompasses physical artefacts and intangible aspects inherited from past generations, reflecting the history and traditions of societies. Meanwhile, {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} constantly evolves due to complex historical processes, necessitating preservation and protection efforts to prevent its loss over time [@loulanski_revising_2006]. The dynamic nature of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} demands collaborative actions, including documentation and the use of a range of technologies.
+
+The concept of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} is also characterised by perpetual evolution, mirroring the historical processes that shape societies over time. Social, political, economic, and technological shifts invariably influence the definition and perception of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}, prompting continuous reinterpretations and reevaluations of its significance. Over the years, the enthusiasm for the protection of cultural property has enriched the term with new shades of meaning. As societies undergo transformations, new layers of meaning and relevance are superimposed on existing {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}, perpetually enriching its essence. As articulated by [@ferrazzi_notion_2021 p. 765]:
+
+> ‘Cultural heritage’, as an abstract legacy or as a merge of tangible and intangible values, is able to encompass the totality of culture(s); in so, assuming a symbolic value that brings a clear break with all other terminologies. In conclusion, ‘cultural heritage’ as a legal term has demonstrated more than any others to be a real ensemble of historical stratification and cultural diversity.
+
+The advent of globalisation and rapid advancements in technology have further accelerated the evolution of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}. Increased interconnectedness and cross-cultural interactions have led to the fusion of traditions and the emergence of novel cultural expressions. Moreover, the digital era has facilitated the dissemination of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} resources on a global scale, transcending geographical barriers and preserving cultural knowledge for future generations as [@portales_digital_2018].
+
+Thus, the intriguing nature of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} resources can be attributed to their multifaceted and diverse characteristics. The conservation and promotion of these resources demand a nuanced comprehension of the various types of heritage resources, culminating in effective preservation and promotion strategies that can account for their heterogeneity [@windhager_visualization_2019].
+
+According to [@unesco_institute_for_statistics_unesco_2009], {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} includes tangible and intangible heritage. Tangible {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} refers to physical objects such as artworks, artefacts, monuments, and buildings, while intangible {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} comprises practices, knowledge, folklore and traditions that hold cultural significance [@munjeri_tangible_2004]. The concept of heritage has evolved through a process of extension to include objects that were not traditionally considered part of the heritage. The criteria for selecting heritage have also changed, taking into account cultural value, identity, and the ability of the object to evoke memory. This shift has led to the recognition and protection of intangible {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}, challenging a Eurocentric perspective and embracing cultural diversity as a valuable asset for humanity [@vecco_definition_2010].
 
+Conservation guidelines have broadened the concept of heritage to include not only individual buildings and sites but also groups of buildings, historical areas, towns, environments, social factors, and intangible heritage [@ahmad_scope_2006]. In 2019, another instance of {{ "UNESCO" | abbr | safe }} defines {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} in an even more comprehensive manner, taking into account natural heritage:
+
+> Cultural heritage is, in its broadest sense, both a product and a process, which provides societies with a wealth of resources that are inherited from the past, created in the present and bestowed for the benefit of future generations. Most importantly, it includes not only tangible, but also natural and intangible heritage. [@unesco_culture_for_development_indicators_methodology_2014 p. 130]
+
+In thinking about the concept of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }}, I find this last definition particularly resonant. This broader perspective is motivated by my interest with {{ "LOUD" | abbr | safe }} specifications as a research area, particularly because of their notable data agnosticism and as it resonated with @hyvonen_cultural_2012 [pp. 1-3]'s subdivision of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} as well. These services have the adaptability to process and use different types of data, transcending the boundaries of specific domains or disciplines. Although grounded in concrete {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} cases, their potential to extend to any type of data, including those from {{ "STEM" | abbr | safe }}, is a compelling prospect that warrants further exploration, a point that I will explore later.
+
+The following sub-subsections aim to briefly discuss tangible, intangible, and natural heritage, as well as providing a definition of {{ "CH" | abbr | safe }} data which can serve as a foundational reference for this thesis.
+
+##### 3.1.1.1 Tangible Heritage {id="subsubsec:tangible"}
+
+(...)
 
 Data processing offers great potential for humanities research as @owens_defining_2011 argues: ‘In the end,
-the kinds of questions humanists ask about texts and artifacts are just as relevant to ask of data. While the new and exciting prospects of processing data offer humanists a range of exciting possibilities for
-research, humanistic approaches to the textual and artifactual qualities of data also have a considerable amount to offer to the interpretation of data’.
+the kinds of questions humanists ask about texts and artifacts are just as relevant to ask of data. While the new and exciting prospects of processing data offer humanists a range of exciting possibilities for research, humanistic approaches to the textual and artifactual qualities of data also have a considerable amount to offer to the interpretation of data’.
+
+(...)
 
 ## 4. Exploring Relationships through an Actor-Network Theory Lens {id="cha:theoretical"}