ABSTRACT

Accuracy, artefact, feature, precision, reconstruction, resolution, texture, uncertainty are words central to many discussions of the documentation of cultural heritage. This terminology, whilst broadly understood across the disciplines, is often misunderstood due to its specific use in particular cases. An interdisciplinary dialogue conducted over a period of years and comprising experts in a range of fields—art history, colour science, engineering, semantics, mathematics, cultural heritage, museum studies, and others—has yielded a challenging discussion document that considers the thorny issue of a shared understanding of a set of keywords. On occasion our perceived shared language is not shared at all but reveals—at times through subtle nuance, and yet at times through gaping chasm—the disciplinary subjectivities we hold unbeknownst to ourselves. Mutual understanding of some of these key terms is central to any newly engaged, participatory transdisciplinary endeavour that seeks to develop critical methods for the documentation, analysis, preservation, and sharing of cultural heritage objects outside the traditional disciplinary silos. This chapter charts the interdisciplinary discussion towards a common understanding of terminologies used in cultural heritage. It is a discussion that recognizes critical differences or common misuse, and aims to contribute to a shared understanding that may be useful for all knowledge domains in the field. The chapter summarizes the work of a number of Think Tanks conducted by Early Career Investigators participating in the COSCH network.

Keywords: cultural heritage, interdisciplinary research terminology, metrology, humanities, digital documentation, COSCH

Introduction

The digital documentation of material cultural heritage is a multidisciplinary task and often involves experts in spectral and spatial recording, and Information and Communication Technology (ICT). When generating digital representations of objects of cultural heritage, a shared understanding is necessary to develop suitable and user-oriented solutions. However, reaching a shared understanding is complex. It begins with a clear definition of the project's aim(s), including the explanation of concepts, terms, and procedures that may be unknown to some project partners. These first steps may seem obvious and should be the basis not only for multidisciplinary projects, but for all projects. However, these tasks are more multifaceted in multidisciplinary projects as, in addition to unfamiliar disciplinary terminology, each project partner might use terms that are common to various domains, but may have inherently different meanings.