Contained in:
Book Chapter

From Object to Relational System: A Semantic Relational Density Index for Evaluating Ecclesiastical Heritage

  • Hira Ovais
  • Lavinia Chiara Tagliabue
  • Silvia Meschini

Conventional conservation approaches to ecclesiastical architecture remain predominantly object-centered, privileging material condition and stylistic attributes while underrepresenting relational networks that sustain cultural meaning. This paper introduces a Semantic Relational Density (SRD) Index to evaluate the connectivity of architectural elements within their cultural relationships. The framework uses CIDOC CRM to structure entity–relationship logic and UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage domains to classify cultural practices, while network centrality measures their structural connectivity. Applied to three colonial-era churches in Karachi, Pakistan, the results show differentiated patterns of connectivity and varying degrees of semantic integration across architectural elements.

  • Keywords:
  • Ecclesiastical Heritage,
  • Intangible Cultural Heritage,
  • CIDOC CRM,
  • Heritage Evaluation,
  • Semantic Relational Density (SRD),
+ Show More

Hira Ovais

University of Turin, Italy - ORCID: 0009-0008-3632-3326

Lavinia Chiara Tagliabue

University of Turin, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0002-3059-4204

Silvia Meschini

University of Turin, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0001-6894-2369

  1. Alivizatou, Marilena. “Contextualising Intangible Cultural Heritage in Heritage Studies and Museology.” International Journal of Intangible Heritage III (2008): 44-54.
  2. Boylan, Patrick J. “The Intangible Heritage: A Challenge for Museums and Museum Professional Training.” International Journal of Intangible Heritage I (2006): 54-65.
  3. Carboni, Nicola, and Livio de Luca. “Towards a Conceptual Foundation for documenting Tangible and Intangibleelements a cultural object.” Digital Applications in Archeology and Cultural Heritage (Elsevier) 3 (2016): 108-116.
  4. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Barbara. “Intangible Heritage as a Metacultural Production.” Museum International 56, no. 1 (2004): 52-65.
  5. Kurin, Richard. “US Consideration of the Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention.” Intangible Cultural Heritage 36, no. 1 & 2 (2014): 325-358.
  6. Naeem, Anila. “Inventory of Historic Places: A Systematic Method for their Identification, Evaluation and Determining Significance Part II: Case Studies.” Journal of Research in Architecture and Planning I, no. 10 (2011).
  7. Nelson, Kevin. “Mapping Intangible Cultural Heritage in an Urban Context: Case of Historic City of Nashik, India.” Civil Engineering and Architecture ( Horizon Research Publishing(HRPUB)) 12, no. 6 (2024).
  8. Riegl, Alois. “The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and its origin.” A Journal for Ideas and Criticism in Architecture: Oppositions 25 (1982).
  9. Uroš, Radosavljević, Đorđević Aleksandra, Lalović Kseniјa, Živković Jelena, and Đukanović Zoran. “Nodes and Networks: The Generative Role of Cultural Heritage for Urban Revival in Kikinda.” Sustainability (MDPI) 11, no. 9 (2019).
  10. Basim, Mahmood, Al-Ameen Zohair, and Salih Hasan Ahmed. “Concise Analysis of Intangible Cultural Heritage Practices in Connection with Sustainable Development Goals.” INFORMATIK 2024. Wiesbaden, Germany, 2024.
  11. Bekiari, C., G. Bruseker, M. Doerr, C. E. Ore, S. Stead, and A. Velios. Volume A: definition of the CIDOC conceptual reference model. CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group, 2021.
  12. Doerr, Martin. “The CIDOC CRM - an Ontological Approach to Semantic Interoperability of Metadata.” AI Magzine 24, no. 3 (2003).
  13. GoP. “ANTIQUITIES ACT 1975.” Government of Pakistan, 1975.
  14. ICOMOS. “Nara Document of Authenticity.” 1994. https://landscapes.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/1994-NARA-document-on-authenticity-International-Council-on-Monuments-and-Sites-1.pdf.
  15. ICOMOS-Australia. The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance. Australia ICOMOS, 2013.
  16. Kreps, Christina. “Indigenous Curation as Intangible Heritage: Thoughts on the Relevance of the 2003 UNESCO Convention.” Theorizing Cultural Heritage (Smithsonian institution. Center for folklife and cultural heritage) I, no. 2 (2005): 3-8.
  17. Mason, Randall. “Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices.” In Assessing the Values of Cultural Heritage, by Marta de la Torre. Los Angeles: The Getty Conservation Institute, 2002.
  18. UNESCO. “Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Paris: UNESCO.” UNESCO. 2003. : https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000132540.
  19. Blake, Janet. “UNESCO’s 2003 Convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage: The implications of community involvement in ‘safeguarding’.” In Intangible Heritage. Routledge, 2008.
  20. Fielden, Bernard. Conservation of Historic Buildings. London: Routledge, 2003.
  21. Frey, Bruno S. The Evaluation of Cultural Heritage: Some Critical Issues. Palgrave Macmillan Books, 1997.
  22. Jokilehto, Jukka. A History of Architectural Conservation. Routledge, 2018.
  23. Lipe, William D. Approaches to the Archeological Heritage: A Comparative Study of World Cutlural Resource Management Systems. Cambridge University Press), 2014.
  24. Newman, Mark. Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
  25. Smith, Laurajane. Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge, 2006.
PDF
  • Publication Year: 2026
  • Pages: 3010-3035

XML
  • Publication Year: 2026

Chapter Information

Chapter Title

From Object to Relational System: A Semantic Relational Density Index for Evaluating Ecclesiastical Heritage

Authors

Hira Ovais, Lavinia Chiara Tagliabue, Silvia Meschini

Language

English

DOI

10.36253/979-12-215-1113-0.128

Peer Reviewed

Publication Year

2026

Copyright Information

© 2026 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Bibliographic Information

Book Title

ReUso 2026 - New heritage and future strategies. Perspectives on conservation and promotion

Book Subtitle

14th International Congress Barcelona-Girona, 4-7 November

Editors

Alessandro Scarnato, Marisa García Vergara, Ángeles Layuno Rosas

Peer Reviewed

Publication Year

2026

Copyright Information

© 2026 Author(s)

Content License

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Metadata License

CC0 1.0

Publisher Name

Firenze University Press

DOI

10.36253/979-12-215-1113-0

eISBN (pdf)

979-12-215-1113-0

eISBN (xml)

979-12-215-1112-3

Series Title

ReUso

0

Fulltext
downloads

0

Views

Export Citation

1,530

Open Access Books

in the Catalogue

3,867

Book Chapters

6,674,567

Fulltext
downloads

6,258

Authors

from 1241 Research Institutions

of 69 Nations

83

scientific boards

from 417 Research Institutions

of 46 Nations

1,439

Referees

from 400 Research Institutions

of 41 Nations