 So, good afternoon, dear colleagues, and thank you for having me and letting me join the club. For over 50 years, the Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology at the University of Cologne has conducted archaeological research and field work in Africa. Naturally, large quantities of documentations and analysis have accumulated, of which are the surprising, only the results could be published. Large quantities of processed data can only rarely be made available in print. What is rightfully requested as best scientific practice is usually represented by condensed statistics and yet has been regarded as perfectly acceptable in our discipline in the past. These are the books printed in our own edition. Well, this is not the place and time to debate about the philosophy of open access. However, it is our understanding that by now the remaining choice of action is whether to join in shaping the standards of future data management or wait until others will do so. So, by now the German Science Foundation has released detailed requirements that pertain to the handling of digital research data, which clearly aim at open source standards outlined by the Horizon 2020 agreement and are in accord to best practice procedures. It seems almost obsolete to quote. Yes, this was our plan of action. We'll see how far we got. The recently published European Council statement that aims at unlimited open access publishing for publicly sponsored projects will hardly be the last novelty we can expect in the realm of digital data management. So, over the last 50 years, initially visual accessible documentation on analog media has evidently expanded to include digitally genuine and computable data, for instance, sensor data. Back in 2012, we started the African Archaeology Archive Cologne. The project's second phase has recently ended. I am kind of the backburn. In response to the visual nature of our documentation in the shape of photographs, drawings, texts and other documents sheets, it was naturally to seek the cooperation with already operational platforms, like the advanced IT infrastructure of the German Archaeological Institute, DAI, with Arachne. So, just a schematic. This is the green point. No. Oh, other way around. Okay, so this is us, and this is Arachne. And the digital image repository and object database at its core. Further, DAI digital tools include Xenon, the bibliographical platform, and the IDI gazetteer for geographical reference. Bonus on top of it is the option of importing whole machine-readable books, articles, and gray literature, as well as linking digital research data made accessible through the Janus repository. So, five decades of progressing research on disparate subjects naturally generate a multitude of data models and documentation concepts. Special care was therefore given to devising an overall data model with the additional bonus that future research can be made to fit. The Arachne object database allows for a large pictorial input with a constrained amount of metadata annotation. And on the one hand, and a broadly structured object database that takes advantage of the interlinking options of the other platforms of the IDI world on the other hand. So, please allow me to illustrate this. This was our old page. And we had only pictures. So, this is the picture view. The goal of the archive's first project phase from 2012 to 2014 was to implement large-scale, automatized, retro digitization, metadata annotation, and online visualization. The entire metadata structure is based on the obvious concept of a geographical framework from the country down to the site and its subdivision. You have the picture metadata and here you can see, visualize the point in the hierarchy, in the geographical hierarchy. But this is the old site. So, consequently, I will now sketch the configuration of the interlinked online platforms. I made a small tutorial screen caption. So, obviously, check. So, obviously, the three axes of accession are bibliography, geography, and semantics. We shall start with the latter. Let's see how it works. It doesn't. That's the problem. Okay. So, as we are dealing, as Rockart is much nicer to look at, I'll exemplify with a brand back in Namibia. So, the average user will probably know the archive, and hopefully find our project page on the university site, which is linked with the project page on the hosting platform. A semantic search in both a controlled description, vocabulary, and in free text is enabled. Menus will also visualize the picture metadata. Please note that as of now, I am browsing with my personal clearance image categories that are usually protected under the rights of publicity are visible. For archaeological research, the principal objects are naturally topographical sites. And there are aggregations into areas, regions, et cetera, that are referenced in a hierarchical relation. The search engine not only offers the object categories as filters, but also free semantic keywords available within the metadata. With a geo-referenced localization, that was on cue, it is only natural to offer a gazetteer for geography-based research, which for thorough notes also incorporates geo-names IDs. The geographical hierarchy provides orientation and allows browsing down to the site and subdivisions. The sites visible in the DIA gazetteer show only rounded coordinates in accordance with the practice of the DAI. Therefore, in ARC, we release exact coordinates only upon authenticated request. The triple X section is then completed with Xenon, a bibliographical tool of the DAI. I'm getting to it. It's linked on, yes, here we are. Which will enable a state of the art bibliographical research. Publications that are accessible online are linked with their viewing tool. The aforementioned YANOS National Repository for Archaeological Research Data is a work-in-process project that will curate, migrate and make available, especially machine-readable data. That's where the plan is to store the raw data or you can download it. So, yes, this is the book viewer. Is it finished? Yes, and this is the semantic linking. And YANOS. No? This is YANOS, the data platform. Okay, I'll stop the movie now. Okay, so what is the use of this all? Is the legitimate question that might come up? Our intention is to provide access to research data with a low-access threshold through digital platforms that initially address the traditional visual perception in humanities, but at the same time open up through state-of-the-art technology towards more sophisticated methods of research. So please let me close with pointing out a few issues specific to our object of research, the tangible and intangible heritage of the African continent. African archaeology might have passed the stage of cultural imperialism, yet we are still meddling in and exporting cultural heritage, an issue we are very protective about in our home countries. To give but a free example, most of the books I showed you earlier are doctoral dissertations that until recently were required to be published in German, a language few people understand in the countries where the object of research originates. And usually we are taking advantage of the fact that more often than not in African countries, cultural heritage management is underfunded in comparison to the so-called Western world. We would like to propose to use the accessibility of digital tools and methods for returning the cultural values and findings of our research. And a very good example for such an approach is the cooperation between the National Corporation for Antiquities and Museums of Sudan and the DAI in digitizing the famous Hinkle archive for use with site management. And it is accessible through the same platform as ARC, the IDI world. So I was, I hope I was only, I was able to briefly sketch the methods, goals and opportunities and problems. And I hope we have points to discuss. Thank you.