Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Towards Multidisciplinary Annotation of Fluid Historical Corpora Using Linked Data Cover

Towards Multidisciplinary Annotation of Fluid Historical Corpora Using Linked Data

Open Access
|Jun 2026

References

  1. Balck, S., Frank, I., Beyer-Thoma, H., & Ananieva, A. (2023). Interlinking text and data with semantic annotation and ontology design patterns to analyse historical travelogues. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 17. 10.63744/ysaur3gpvrx8
  2. Barrau, J. (2011). Did medieval monks actually speak Latin? In S. Vanderputten (Ed.), Understanding Monastic Practices of Oral Communication (Western Europe, tenth-thirteenth centuries) (pp. 293317). Brepols. 10.1484/M.USML-EB.3.4967
  3. Bauer, B. (2025). Linked open data and manuscripts descriptions. Das Mittelalter, 30, 3853.
  4. Bauer, T. (1997). Lotharingien als historischer Raum. Böhlau.
  5. Berners-Lee, T. (2006). Linked data: Design issues. https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html (Accessed 2026-04-30).
  6. BHL. (1898–99 & 1986). Bibliotheca hagiographica latina. Brussels.
  7. Birkholz, J., & Budke, L. (2021). Distant and close reading in literature. Interférences Littéraires/Literaire Interferenties 25, 204217.
  8. Borek, L., Busch, H., Döring, K., Ketschik, N., & Zeppezauer-Wachauer, K. (2025). Einleitung. Schnittstelle Mediävistik. Kollaborationen der Mittelalterforschung im digitalen Zeitalter. Das Mittelalter, 30, 117.
  9. Bray, T. (2017). The javascript object notation (json) data interchange format. RFC 8259. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8259 (Accessed 2026-04-30).
  10. Brunhölzl, F. (1996). Histoire de la littérature latine du moyen Âge. Brepols.
  11. Burrows, T., Emery, D., Fraas, M., Hyvönen, E., Ikkala, E., Koho, M., Lewis, D., Morrison, A., Page1, K., Ransom, L., Thomson, E., Tuominen, J., Velios, A., & Wijsman, H. (2020). Mapping manuscript migrations knowledge graph: Data for tracing the history and provenance of medieval and Renaissance manuscripts. Journal of Open Humanities Data, 6(3). 10.5334/johd.14
  12. Clackson, J., & Horrocks, G. (2011). The Blackwell History of the Latin language. Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444343397
  13. De Jong, F., Maegaard, B., Smedt, K. D., Fišer, D., & Uytvanck, D. V. (2018). CLARIN: Towards fair and responsible data science using language resources. In N. Calzolari, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018) (pp. 32593264). European Language Resources Association (ELRA). 10.63317/2dvrmm3635mu
  14. De Valeriola, S., & Dubuisson, B. (2025). L’hagiographie à l’aune du numérique: nouvelles perspectives d’étude des légendiers latins. Monte Artium, 16.
  15. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Communities of practice: where language, gender, and power all live. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwoman (Eds.), Locating power. Proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 8999). University of California.
  16. Franzini, G., Terras, M., & Mahony, S. (2016). A catalogue of digital editions. In M. J. Driscoll & E. Pierazzo (Eds.), Digital scholarly editing: Theories and practices (pp. 161182). Open Book Publishers. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1fzhh6v.13
  17. Goullet, M. (2005). Écriture et réécriture hagiographiques. Brepols. 10.1484/M.HAG-EB.5.106042
  18. Heath, T., & Bizer, C. (2011). Linked data: Evolving the web into a global data space. Morgan and Claypool. 10.1007/978-3-031-79432-2
  19. Herrera Malatesta, E., & de Valeriola, S. (2024). Ambiguous landscapes: A framework for assessing robustness and uncertainties in archaeological point pattern analysis. PLOS ONE, 19, e0307743. 10.1371/journal.pone.0307743
  20. Herrick, S. (2020). Hagiography and the history of Latin Christendom 500–1500. Brill. 10.1163/9789004417472
  21. Hyvönen, E. (2022). Digital humanities on the Semantic Web: SAMPO model and portal series. Semantic Web, 14, 729744. 10.3233/SW-223034
  22. IFLA. (2017). IFLA library reference model: A conceptual model for bibliographic information. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. https://repository.ifla.org/handle/20.500.14598/40 (Accessed 2026-04-30).
  23. IFLA. (2026). LRMoo: object-oriented definition and mapping from the ifla library reference model. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. https://repository.ifla.org/handle/20.500.14598/3677.2 (Accessed 2026-04-30).
  24. IIIF Consortium. (2023). IIIF Presentation API Specification. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/ (W3C Recommendation).
  25. Jenset, G. B., & McGillivray, B. (2017). Quantitative historical linguistics: A corpus framework. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198718178.001.0001
  26. Johansson, M., & Isabella, O. (2023). Comparative study of REST and gRPC for microservices in established software architectures. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2
  27. Krönert, K. (2021). Hagiographie in Lotharingien: Bilanz und Perspektiven. In T. Martine & J. Nowak (Eds.), D’un regnum à l’autre. La Lotharingie, un espace de l’entre-deux? (pp. 351363). Éditions de l’Université de Lorraine. 10.4000/13ny2
  28. Lauersdorf, M. R. (2019). Historical (Standard) Language Development and the Writing of Historical Identities: A Plaidoyer for a Data-Driven Approach to the Investigation of the Sociolinguistic History of (not only) Slovak. In S. M. Dickey & M. R. Lauersdorf (Eds.), V zeleni drželi zeleni breg: Studies in honor of Marc L. Greenberg (pp. 199218). Slavica Publishers.
  29. Lauersdorf, M. R. (2021). Historical sociolinguistics and the necessity of interdisciplinary collaboration. In A. Burkette & T. Warhol (Eds.), Crossing Borders, Making Connections: Interdisciplinarity in Linguistics (pp. 207230). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501514371-015
  30. Luger, D., & Vogeler, G. (2025). From Digital to Distant Diplomatics. Digital Diplomatics 1(2025). 10.7788/9783412530921
  31. Maza, S. (2017). Thinking about history. University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226109473.001.0001
  32. McGann, J. (1991). The textual condition. Princeton University Press. 10.1515/9780691217758
  33. Nichols, S. (1990). Introduction: Philology in a Manuscript Culture. Speculum, 65, 110. 10.2307/2864468
  34. Nichols, S. (2024). The Textual Variant Unchained: Medieval Europe, Variants and Variance in Classical Textual Tradition. In G. Most (Ed.), Errors, Innovations, Proliferation, Reception? (pp. 391412). De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783111054360-013
  35. Philippart, G. (1977). Les légendiers latins. Brepols.
  36. Philippart, G. (1994–2020). Hagiographies, 8 v. Brepols.
  37. Pien, J., Limpenus, J., Veldius, J., Stiltingus, J., Suyskens, C., Perierus, J., Stickerus, U., Cleus, J., Bouttats, P. B., & Houbraken, J. (1746–1762). Acta Sanctorum Septembris ex Latinis & Græcis, aliarumque gentium monumentis, servatâ primigeniâ veterum scriptorum phrasi: quo dies primus, secundus & tertius continentur, cum tractatu praeliminari De Diaconissis auctore Joanne Pinio. Apud Bernardum Albertum vander Plassche.
  38. Piotrowski, M., & Xanthos, A. (2020). Décomposer les humanités numériques. Humanités Numériques, 1. 10.4000/revuehn.381
  39. Poulin, J. C. (2006). Les libelli dans l’édition hagiographique avant le XIIe siècle. In M. Heinzelmann (Ed.), Livrets, collections et textes: Etudes sur la tradition hagiographique latine (pp. 15193). Jan Thorbeke Verlag.
  40. Putzu, I. (2026). Communities of Practice, Communities of Discourse, and Text Communities: Between Synchrony and Diachrony. In P. Molinelli & C. Ghezzi (Eds.), Multilingualism and Writing Practices in Defining Communities: Italy in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages (pp. 1750). De Gruyter Brill. 10.1515/9783112233214-002
  41. TEI Consortium. (2023). TEI P5: Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. https://tei-c.org/guidelines/p5/ (Accessed 2026-04-30).
  42. Vanderputten, S., & Breitbarth, A. (2026). The Many Manuscript Faces of the Miracula Sancti Remacli: Textual Fluidity and Variation in High Medieval Hagiographies. Scriptorium.
  43. W3C. (2013). SPARQL 1.1 Query Language. https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/ (W3C Recommendation).
  44. W3C. (2014). RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax. https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/ (W3C Recommendation, accessed 2026-04-30).
  45. Witt, J. C. (2024). Finding Relatedness: pathways for detecting textual relatedness in the medieval scholastic corpus. Methodos. https://journals.openedition.org/methodos/10987
  46. Wright, R. (2002). A Sociophilological Study of Late Latin. Brepols. 10.1484/M.USML-EB.5.106445
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/johd.539 | Journal eISSN: 2059-481X
Language: English
Page range: 73 - 73
Submitted on: Mar 15, 2026
Accepted on: May 15, 2026
Published on: Jun 5, 2026
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2026 Anne Breitbarth, Julie M. Birkholz, Joren Six, Steven Vanderputten, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.