The 5th EUROMED conference brings together researchers, policy makers, professionals, fellows and practitioners to explore some of the more pressing issues concerning Cultural Heritage today. In particular, the main goal of the conference is to focus on interdisciplinary and multi-disciplinary research on tangible and intangible Cultural Heritage, using cutting edge technologies for the protection, restoration, preservation, massive digitalization, documentation and presentation of the Cultural Heritage contents. At the same time, the event is intended to cover topics of research ready for exploitation, demonstrating the acceptability of new sustainable approaches and new technologies by the user community, owners, managers and conservators of our cultural patrimony.
Topics and themes:
Researchers and practitioners willing to participate to the EUROMED 2014 conference are invited to submit papers on original works addressing the following subjects and research themes:
i) DIGITAL HERITAGE DOCUMENTATION and PRESERVATION
ii) PROTECTION, RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION OF TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE
More detail information regarding the themes can be found at: http://www.euromed2014.eu/index.php/call-for-participation/
The conference accepts only original, unpublished work written in English which will be blind-reviewed and published on SPRINGER LNCS.
http://www.euromed2014.eu/index.php/call-for-participation/
@Giuseppe, thanks for Your valuable information.Our friend Lijo just had came back from Cyprus! Fine place for conference as well as main objectives of the meeting! I do hope that I could attend it! :)
@Giuseppe, thanks for Your valuable information.Our friend Lijo just had came back from Cyprus! Fine place for conference as well as main objectives of the meeting! I do hope that I could attend it! :)
Dear Magdelena,
I love critic thoughts and critical approaches. Please, explain more in deep — if you prefer. Thank you.
—g
Mhm. If I undertand right, your thought is that a more standardized scheme should be adopted in the call for ideas/papers phase; in particular, same standards we're progressively introducing for some particular disciplines (health, medical, pharmaceutical, pandemic controls, something agricultural like seeds' supply-chains, trade, goods import/exports, etx.), should be adopted also for culture arguments, if a call for submission is concerned. So that the evaluation tasks, also for sharing a scientific paper about culture [say, a new model to use physics in the field of CH preservation] could be better "quantified".
A standard.
Yes, I do understand.
Brussels believes that a sort of "reductive standard model” is the solution for everything. In terms of mathematics, it is not acceptable. Nor in terms of physics; nor in cultural, nor philosophic, nor historical terms. Perhaps could we have some benefit on an organizational point of view? No, we could not.
The aim to reduce complexity standardizing more and more reductive filters, will constrict the genetic capability of several precious factors, shortening some evolutionary mechanisms useful for something not programmable: the ”exaptation” of growth factors, thus the "multiplicity” [Oops. Just a pharmaceutical need!]
It will happen. Or not, sorry: it is already happening, just here, in Europe.
—g
http://books.google.it/books?id=I_OA3tnnWqsC&pg=PA302&lpg=PA302&dq=reducing+multiplicity&source=bl&ots=bhj3BkKd-Q&sig=AvwSfZmDZDEn5cxTNeoF1bil1hc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=77eUU4CoHaaq0QXOmoDACA&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=reducing%20multiplicity&f=false
The difference between standards and shared criteria stays in the dynamics typology. I read COST/TDP and the scheme is again the same: we share discussion/aims/objectives/thoughts BEFORE, than we reach a standardized set of rules. Standard 1.0. Static. To have any modify, we have to wait for next session of new discussion = revision assessment — and at its end, we will have a new set of rules : Standard 1.1. Static, again.
In the rules setting up phase, the need is to change the model: to a "standardization” one (1), we have to replace an evolutionary mechanism (2). The latter, does not include the equation Shared = Fixed.
—g
Ok Magdelena, no objections of course.
BTW, for Cyprus please consider that the phase for "decisions" is still open, and one could still propose workshops, arguments, panels, scientific experts, general criteria [it is the reason why I was selected to be an active part of it].
Good day.
—g
Here is the Workshop proposed by the Consortium I'm coordinating [The EUHeritageTOUR, some related recent papers are published on RG].
In the next days, we're going to open a Call for papers and participation within the framework of the 5 indicated panels.
—g
http://www.culturalheritage2014.eu/index.php/workshops/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Conferences