Semantic Bridging as Contextual Interoperability Infrastructure for GLAM Discovery: A Design-Based Research Study

Majidah Majidah; Dian Hasfera; M Fadli

doi:10.15408/bat.v32i2.51983

Authors

Majidah Majidah Universitas Terbuka https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2451-1492
Dian Hasfera Universitas Islam Negeri Imam Bonjol Padang
M. Fadli Universitas Islam Negeri Imam Bonjol Padang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15408/bat.v32i2.51983

Keywords:

information repackaging; semantic bridging; GLAM discovery; metadata interoperability; design-based research

Abstract

Purpose

This study theorises information repackaging as a semantic bridging strategy for contextual interoperability in Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums (GLAM) discovery systems, addressing persistent fragmentation of access to conceptually interrelated resources across libraries, archives, galleries, and museums.

Method

Adopting a first-cycle design-based research orientation, the study integrates problem analysis with conceptual artefact development. MARC21, DACS/EAD, VRA Core, CIDOC CRM, and Dublin Core are examined through crosswalk modelling, relationship typology construction, and design rationale articulation to formulate an intermediary semantic bridging framework for cross-domain discovery.

Results/findings

GLAM interoperability emerges as not merely technical but contextual and epistemological, since each standard inscribes heritage meaning through divergent descriptive logics. The framework recasts information repackaging as a relational transformation mechanism, operationalised through identification, form selection, reprocessing, organisation, and dissemination. The resulting intermediary layer establishes shared semantic anchors, explicit relationship assertions, and explanation-driven recommendations, enabling cross-collection discovery without schema replacement or wholesale migration.

Conclusion

The model substantiates information repackaging as viable contextual interoperability infrastructure, reconciling institutional metadata traditions with cross-collection discoverability, pending validation through expert appraisal, prototyping, and user evaluation in subsequent design-based research cycles.

References

Alkemade, H., Candela, G., Claeyssens, S., Eskevich, M., Freire, N., Gabriels, N., Irollo, A., Isaac, A., Lehmann, J., Murphy, J., Oberbichler, S., & Osti, G. (2025). Write it Down! Fostering Responsible Reuse of Cultural Heritage Data with Interoperable Dataset Descriptions. AI4LAM. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17725565

Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813

Atmi, R. T., Putri, C. F., & Babbar, P. (2025). Digital information repackaging: best practices from university library website managers. Library Hi Tech News, 42(4), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-07-2024-0122

Baca, M. (2008). Introduction to metadata. Getty Research Institute.

Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1

Candela, G. (2023). Towards a semantic approach in GLAM Labs: The case of the Data Foundry at the National Library of Scotland. Journal of Information Science, 52(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515231174386

CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group. (2026). CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model. https://cidoc-crm.org/

DCMI Usage Board. (2020). DCMI metadata terms. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/

Doerr, M., Ore, C.-E., & Stead, S. (2007). The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model - A New Standard for Knowledge Sharing. 51–56. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1420.6400

Easterday, M., Rees Lewis, D., & Gerber, E. (2016). The logic of the theoretical and practical products of design research. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 125–144. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2464

Farhah, R., & Lawanda, I. I. (2023). Information Practices of University’s Civil Servants in Managing Family Archives for Asset Declarations. Buletin Al-Turas, 29(1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.15408/bat.v29i1.26685

Freire, N., Robson, G., Howard, J. B., Manguinhas, H., & Isaac, A. (2017). Metadata Aggregation: Assessing the Application of IIIF and Sitemaps Within Cultural Heritage. International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:29518446

Gaitanou, P., Andreou, I., Sicilia, M.-A., & Garoufallou, E. (2024). Linked data for libraries: Creating a global knowledge space, a systematic literature review. Journal of Information Science, 50(1), 204–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221084645

Garba, A., & Wu, S. (2025). Snippet-based result merging in federated search. Journal of Information Science, 51(3), 623–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221144864

Hevner, A., R, A., March, S., T, S., Park, Park, J., Ram, & Sudha. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28, 75.

Hillmann, D., Dushay, N., & Phipps, J. (2004). Improving metadata quality: Augmentation and recombination. Distributed Computing - DC, 7.

Hjørland, B. (2023). Information. Knowledge Organizationh, 50, 47–79. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2023-1-47

Hyvönen, E. (2019). Using the Semantic Web in digital humanities: Shift from data publishing to data-analysis and serendipitous knowledge discovery. Semantic Web, 11, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-190386

Hyvönen, E. (2020). Using the Semantic Web in digital humanities: Shift from data publishing to data-analysis and serendipitous knowledge discovery. Semantic Web, 11(1), 187–193. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-190386

Isaac, A., Raemy, J., Meijers, E., Valk, S., & Freire, N. (2020). Metadata aggregation via linked data: results of the Europeana Common Culture project. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4062454

Kennan, M. A., & Lymn, J. (2019). Where is the I(nformation) in GLAM? Education, Knowledge and Skill Requirements of Professionals Working in GLAM Sector Institutions. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 68(3), 236–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2019.1613708

Library of Congress. (2025). MARC 21 format for bibliographic data. https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/

Library of Congress. (2026). VRA Core: A data standard for the description of works of visual culture. Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/standards/vracore/

Liu, F., Hindmarch, J., & Hess, M. (2023). A review of the cultural heritage linked open data ontologies and models. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLVIII-M-2–2023, 943–950. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-M-2-2023-943-2023

Majidah, M., Hasfera, D., & Fadli, M. (2025). A Management Model for Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums (GLAM) at Hatta Heritage. Khizanah Al-Hikmah : Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan, Informasi, Dan Kearsipan, 13(1), 170–181. https://doi.org/10.24252/v13i1a14

Mayesti, N. (2023). Public Library and Librarian Stereotypes in The Indonesian Film Kambodja. Buletin Al-Turas, 29(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.15408/bat.v29i2.30658

McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2018). Conducting Educational Design Research: 2nd Edition . Roudledge.

Moyano, J., Pili, A., Nieto-Julián, J. E., Della Torre, S., & Bruno, S. (2023). Semantic interoperability for cultural heritage conservation: Workflow from ontologies to a tool for managing and sharing data. Journal of Building Engineering, 80, 107965. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOBE.2023.107965

O’Neill, B., & Stapleton, L. (2022a). Digital cultural heritage standards: from silo to semantic web. AI and Society, 37(3), 891–903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01371-1

Pasciuto, T., Albertoni, R., & Maggi, R. (2025). Metadata Schemas in Cataloguing the GLAM Domain: an Overview. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515251365580

Petras, V., Hill, T., Stiller, J., & Gäde, M. (2017). Europeana – a Search Engine for Digitised Cultural Heritage Material. Datenbank-Spektrum, 17(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13222-016-0238-1

Putra, R. A., & Adam, H. R. (2026). Saving the Lost Melodies: Community-Based Documentation of Gambang Kromong Intangible Cultural Heritage. Buletin Al-Turas, 32(1), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.15408/bat.v32i1.50484

Sandoval, W. (2014). Conjecture Mapping: An Approach to Systematic Educational Design Research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.778204

Vogt, L. (2025). The CLEAR Principle: organizing data and metadata into semantically meaningful types of FAIR Digital Objects to increase their human explorability and cognitive interoperability. Journal of Biomedical Semantics, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13326-025-00340-7

Walsh, D., Hall, M., Clough, P., & Foster, J. (2017). The ghost in the museum website: Investigating the general public’s interactions with museum websites. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 10450 LNCS, 434–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67008-9_34

Zeng, M. (2019). Interoperability. Knowledge Organizationh, 46, 122–146. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2019-2-122