Table 1: Short e-readiness check: In our check
we only consider the first group of tech-
nologies. We regard the initial investment for
state-of-the-art applications as well as the
further costs of running the application on a
regular basis (i.e. the total cost of ownership)
as prohibitive for most institutions. There
may be scope for simple, low-cost Web-
based applications (e.g. games, VR); howev-
er, these are unlikely to become strong and
Short e-readiness check: For the tech-
nologies below, smaller institutions them-
selves will not find a business case, as they do
not, for example, hold an appropriate vol-
ume of marketable collection objects. They
may only become `e-ready' for, and bene-
fit from, these technologies within a frame-
work of larger heritage initiatives. In such
initiatives, funded mechanisms such as cul-
tural networks/service centres enable small-
er institutions to keep their costs and risks
manageable while not being excluded from
new technological developments.
From the perspective of smaller institutions
Attracting on-site and online visitors through more
compelling interactive and/or immersive ways of
mediating cultural knowledge and experiences,
addressing intellectual and emotional dimensions of
These technologies will most likely remain beyond
the reach of small and most medium-sized institu-
They will need to follow other strategies of attract-
ing on-site and online visitors, such as (virtual)
community projects, regional history or creativity
Virtual Reality (VR)
Cultural Agents and
New Human Interfaces
Haptics and Robotics
Mobile Technologies &
Location Based Services
Providing information to tourists (e.g. location-
based services) and other visitors, for example, on
nearby exhibitions, events or buildings and objects
at cultural sites or areas (e.g. historic city centre,
archaeological excavation area).
Relevant if driven by a cultural network/service
centre in the framework of a larger initiative.
Applications that have high accuracy in speech rec-
ognition or/and automatic translation can enhance
Small to medium-size institutions may also benefit
from such technologies when low-cost applications
Semantic Web technol-
Allow for creating distributed databases of semanti-
cally marked-up information, maintaining them, and
reasoning over them assisted by Semantic Web serv-
Relevant only in a long-term perspective.
Table 1: Adoption by large institutions; longer-term: 6 years and more
From the perspective of smaller institu-
Enhancing the creation, management and Web-based or
other publication of assets; better exploitation of assets,
e.g. through re-use, re-purposing, licensing, etc.
Relevant if collections are digitised in the frame-
work of a national or larger regional initiative, and
the digital assets, rights, and related transactions are
then managed by a cultural network/service centre.
Improving management of copyrights with respect to
collection objects and intellectual property rights, e.g. in
licensing of images, learning objects, etc.
Outsourcing of financial transactions to a service pro-
vider, e.g. for licensing, subscriptions or online museum
Relevant mainly for organisations with certain content
and services, e.g. streaming media.
Search & retrieval is part of many information systems
(e.g. content management). Here we particularly consid-
er systems that allow for an efficient and effective way of
metadata exposure and exchange such as metadata har-
vesting and discovery services.
Collection metadata of smaller institutions may
become included in resource discovery networks in
the framework of national or larger regional initia-
Smart labels and
Improving handling, control and inventory of objects;
with more advanced technology also relevant for applica-
tions such as museum tours.
Although in the longer term the technology may
become affordable for smaller institutions also,
broader adoption seems unlikely.
Table 2: Adoption medium to large-size institutions; medium-term: c.