Leveraging Digitized Heritage Technologies for Smart Fruition: Heritage Understanding and Enhancement Framework

Abstract

Digitized heritage is regarded as an emerging field, with existing studies primarily focusing on one case study, technological aspect, or a methodological approach. Thus, there remains a notable gap in the literature regarding the understanding of how these technologies and methodologies can be utilized in smart heritage fruition. Approaches that harness technological advancements to enhance the decision-making process regarding the use of appropriate methodology at various heritage sites remain insufficiently explored. To address this gap, this study conducted a cross-case analysis to survey the use of heritage technologies across selected cases to find underlying trends and correlations related to the scale and methodology used. The findings of this study provide insights into the nexus of technology integration into heritage fruition, highlighting the role of tangible heritage documentation technologies. The present study concludes that smart fruition framework necessitates an ongoing process involving the integration of cultural heritage data, digital documentation, management, enhancement methodologies, and the Internet of Things (IoT). The IoT facilitates the connectivity of physical items to the internet thereby supporting the understanding of heritage knowledge. Such framework operates through a collaboration platform that engages experts, local communities, and tourists to ensure a meaningful and interactive interconnection.

1. Introduction

Sustainable heritage protection is given prominence in international policies and conventions declared by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and its related organizations, including the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). In order to protect the natural and cultural heritage that possesses outstanding universal values (OUV) for future generations, the 1972 World Heritage Convention established the concept of World Heritage Sites (WHS) [1]. Integrating the sustainable development goals into the execution of the World Heritage Convention necessitates developing a national, regional, and local conservation and management plan [2]. Thus, to guarantee cultural heritage preservation, every country has to create a management and conservation plan, offering strategic direction for sustainable protection [3,4]. In this regard, the Australian ICOMOS Burra Charter has developed an adaptable planning procedure that starts by gathering the data, followed by the evaluation and analysis phase to record the response by incorporating stakeholders at various levels of expertise [5]. Consequently, the WHS framework establishes a set of standards that encourages other nations to use comparable approaches for their cultural heritage preservation programs and to channel research and policy on heritage sites’ sustainable management. Documentation is essential as a first step and during the process, contributing to the site’s management and planning effectiveness. Nowadays, new digital tools for data collection and three-dimensional (3D) representation have become essential for the evolution of heritage site management and conservation plans [6]. Consequently, digitized heritage technologies could be used to record, reconstruct, manage, represent, and interpret cultural heritage knowledge in different domains [7,8]. Hence, digitalization might be the only method to recreate a destroyed object, particularly in the case of knowledge deficiencies regarding the construction process or if the original material needed for restoration is unavailable [9], by generating digital replicas in the form of 3D models in an optimized manner [10]. Accordingly, at the nexus of technology and heritage, digital heritage is the forefront topic [11]. It is a purposeful dialog between culture, technology, and science [7].

In the context of this research, digital heritage is about harnessing the potential of digitized heritage technologies for enhancing the process of heritage management, focusing on heritage understanding and enhancement. Nonetheless, there is a growing interest in the application of digital technology to heritage management to promote the creation of smart heritage [12] and to be operationalized at all levels of the management process [13]. Smart heritage is a theoretical perspective that views utilizing digitalization as a precondition for providing new capabilities for heritage identification, assessment, and response by involving the interaction between people and objects through smart devices in an information and communication technology environment (ICT) [11,14]. Digitized heritage and smart heritage are considered relatively new sciences [15,16]. In light of that, a growing number of studies have explored the role of using various technologies with respect to smart heritage conservation, management, representation, and interpretation [11,12,13,16,17,18,19,20]. Many technologies were proposed in various studies to manage cultural heritage in different contexts. If the goal is to maximize resources in order to accomplish efficient preservation, a priority scale must be constructed [10]. Consequently, it is necessary to define the aims and scopes of the types of technological applications used and consider the capabilities of the applied techniques to prepare a suitable architectural documentation plan for cultural heritage management [6]. The management process spans diverse areas that range from minimum to extensive intervention (including the conservation, maintenance, monitoring, preservation, restoration, reconstruction, adaptation, and interpretation of cultural assets). The goal is to sustainably transfer the different values of heritage to future generations [5], and to enhance accessibility, understanding, and use, thereby enriching cultural heritage fruition. In this response, this study explores how digitized heritage technologies can be leveraged to enrich smart fruition, enhancing heritage understanding by end users.

1.1. Research Problem, Justification, and Significance

Heritage loss is increasing due to various reasons. For example, the devastation of ancient palaces and temples in Nepal following the 2015 earthquake and the more recent and tragic fire at Notre-Dame de Paris Cathedral in 2019 are just a few examples of the disastrous occurrences that heritage buildings have experienced [14]. Architectural heritage documentation has benefited from the diverse methods that emerged in the age of digitalization since traditional methods are expensive and labor-intensive [20]. However, many experts are not well versed in the rapidly evolving technologies that can aid in recording cultural heritage [8]. Also, in some cases, choosing from the range of heritage technologies for achieving a particular result may not be fully understood by heritage specialists, professionals, conservationists, and practitioners [21].

Despite the high contribution of such studies, they typically concentrate on either specific technologies or categories of heritage. Thus, there is a need for comprehensive research in terms of making the decision regarding the most appropriate technology to be used where, for what, and how. Therefore, this study focuses on the process of digitally documenting architectural heritage that is regarded as valuable and worthy of being preserved and passed down to future generations. The goal is to explore the potential of heritage technologies in the management of cultural heritage, with a focus on its smart fruition. This will increase its accessibility and understanding for end users. In summary, there is a lack of a comprehensive approach that can maximize the benefits of this technological revolution in order to aid the decision-making process concerning the exploration of various technological capabilities in heritage management at various sites. Accordingly, there is a need for more in-depth investigations in terms of studying the relationship between digitized heritage and smart fruition. To this end, this study sheds light on the interplay between digitized heritage and architectural heritage by explaining the potential of the various digital architectural heritage applications in smart fruition. The significance of this study lies in providing recommendations that can influence heritage management strategies on a worldwide scale and be utilized by local authorities, planners, and professionals. This study enables experts to make informed decisions about integrating heritage digitalization for heritage enhancement actions.

1.2. Research Questions and Objectives

The primary research question, “What is the relationship between digitized heritage and smart heritage fruition?”, was posed to explore the interplay between documentation technologies, digitized heritage, and smart fruition. Addressing such question necessitates answering the following sub-questions: What are the primary classifications of digitized heritage technologies? And what is the underlying correlation between the heritage scale and the used methodology? The overcharging goal of this research was to maximize the optimum benefits of digitized heritage technologies in the development of smart heritage fruition farmwork. The objectives were to emphasize the significance of utilizing digitized heritage technologies in the documentation of architectural heritage and to survey the use of digital heritage technologies across selected cases to find underlying trends and correlations between the scale and the technology used.

2. Materials and Methods

Desk research through a systematic literature review, which is one of the most employed procedures in the field of heritage reviews to structure pre-existing knowledge into themes and subthemes after summarizing previous studies’ contributions and evaluating the consistency among them [22]. The same procedure was applied in this research to answer, “What are the primary classifications of digitized heritage technologies?”. Keyword searches in Science Direct, Scopus, Google Scholar, and MDPI journals for “Digital Heritage”, “Heritage Documentation”, “Surveying Technologies”, “Image-based Technologies”, “Range-based Technologies”, “Virtual Heritage”, and “Management Technologies” support this review. Additional articles were chosen from the first selected papers to provide the needed explanation. Consequently, three themes emerged, as shown in Figure 1.

Cross-case analysis was applied to answer, “What is the underlying correlation between the heritage scale and the used methodology?”. Cross-cases is a collective or multi-site case study in which every case is thoroughly studied to identify potential patterns and uncover interconnecting themes that may connect these cases [23]. The goal was to analyze various heritage sites utilizing different digitized heritage technologies to understand how they are used to manage architectural heritage thereby enhancing its fruition. The cases were selected based on their location, heritage diversity, inscription on the World Heritage List, level of heritage digitalization, digitalization technology use, and purpose. Finally, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was used to determine the capabilities of the various technologies employed in smart fruition. SWOT analysis is a popular method that could be applied to analyze interactive technologies, such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), or the potential capabilities of heritage technologies [24]. In the context of this research, a SWOT analysis was used to analyze the various digitized heritage technologies in order to define the parameters that influence their selection at various heritage sites. Subsequently, a set of recommendations was proposed to facilitate an inclusive digitized heritage documentation plan.

2.1. What Are the Primary Classifications of Digitized Heritage Technologies?

Documentation is the core of any management process, and generating a 3D model with adequate information is the foundation for heritage documentation to attain sustainable preservation. The digital documentation process usually involves a two-phase procedure, data acquisition and data understanding, which are concerned with transferring data into useful information to build a well-structured database. For instance, all relevant object data are acquired using a range of data capture technologies, followed by data interpretation to transform the obtained data into valuable information in terms of the objects’ values. The provision of this base facilitates the management process in order to make the right response [25]. The use of digitized heritage technologies can lead to a variety of outcomes, including retrieving images of heritage sites, reconstruction, and even assistance in the management of a design intervention [26]. The best documentation methods must be selected according to precise, detailed, object-related inquiries. Choosing the proper technology necessitates having a certain degree of knowledge regarding the possible and available options, sustainability, and the associated limitations and deficiencies [27], as well as defining the documentation’s main aims and scopes [6]. To this end, Figure 2 represents a classification of the different digital heritage documentation methodologies.

2.1.1. Digital Heritage Documentation Methodologies

Digitizing tangible heritage starts with documentation through different surveying methods to create a digital archive of heritage data, including documents, maps, and pictures. The targeted object’s size, its accessibility and complexity, the availability of equipment, and its associated cost [28], in addition to documentation objectives, building condition, significance, and structural integrity, all influence the choice of the surveying technique [25]. The main objective of the surveying process is to record a building’s current situation and determine its measurements, geometry, style, and materials [12]. These initial collected data are essential for creating an accurate and unified point network, serving as the basis for merging point clouds within a single coordinate system, followed by creating and developing a 3D model in the later stages to achieve the survey’s specific goals [28]. In light of this, (a) Global Positioning Systems (GPS) surveying and (b) 3D digital survey technologies were classified as the main technologies used in digitized heritage documentation.

Recently, the utilization of digital survey technologies in heritage documentation has gained wide popularity since they can be used for the largest and smallest buildings and their surroundings [18]. The intended objective, the complexity of architecture, accessibility, and accuracy of work are important factors influencing the selection of digital heritage documentation method [6], in addition to quality, geometrical precision, color correctness, safety, and efficiency [27]. A professional scholar also selects the technology based on the physical state of each asset and the time frame needed to complete the documentation process [8], the size of the digitalization target, cost, texture acquisition, portability of equipment, skill requirements, productivity, accuracy, and adherence to standards [29]. However, the project’s requirements cannot be met by a single approach, and a variety of techniques must be used to achieve the intended outcome. Considering that, digital survey technologies were classified into range-based technologies such as total station theodolite and laser scanning; and image-based technologies [6], such as photogrammetry and infrared thermography. Combining these categories introduces the emergence of hybrid technologies such as photo-laser scanners, structured light, and remote sensing technologies.

2.1.2. Heritage Management Methodologies

Beyond the visually reconstructed 3D models, substantial data are usually gathered, organized, and analyzed, supporting cultural heritage studies and management processes in one spatial reference system [30]. This necessitates genuine collaboration across various disciplines to address different challenges in heritage conservation, restoration, maintenance, monitoring, and communication using technological advancement and automation [31]. In this context, GIS, BIM, and other 2D and 3D-based information systems have been applied as digital heritage management methodologies.

Thus, using information systems enhances the cultural heritage management decision-making process, relying on creating an accessible relationship between the various layers of data [30,31,32]. For instance, using 3D-based information systems relying on 3D digital representations rather than 2D views through a 3D web-based interface accessible to all restoration team members has transformed the management process, offered substantial improvements, and mitigated the limitations of 2D-based information systems in terms of text-based descriptions and limited accessibility. Thus, semantically ordered, high-resolution 3D models with both color and geometry details, functionality that can be accessed through common web browsers by different users at the same time, offering central storage for archives of user-generated data, and user-friendly, interactive navigation are among 3D-based information systems’ valuable advantages. However, challenges arise from the theoretical and practical perspective, especially in terms of its flexibility across different management and restoration contexts [32]. Based on the same theoretical and practical considerations, which stress the necessity of managing architectural heritage in a collaborative and accessible manner anywhere at any time by all users (privately represented by managers and publicly represented by visitors), the 3D-based information systems need to be connected by the IoT thereby creating a smart cultural object. The goal is to integrate these objects in a 3D web-based information system to dynamically and actively generate knowledge based on geo-localized data [31]. Nevertheless, 3D-based information systems are continually evolving to cover the conceptual, technical, methodological, and even the sustainable aspects of integrating human knowledge and multidisciplinary analysis into the reality-based 3D and semantic descriptions of architectural heritage. The “Aïoli” collaborative platform was developed based on these principles to enhance the digital management process and analysis scenarios, involving managing heritage objects’ levels of detail, temporal states, and geometry segmentations, along with enabling communication between the several involved actors to facilitate the decision-making process in onsite and online documentation scenarios. Thus, the goal is to meet the needs of the multiple involved actors and applications through a multi-layer description model, covering the spatiotemporal, morphological, and semantic layers, thereby achieving data traceability [30]. However, implementing such methodology in different contexts is associated with some technical limitations, including the need for high computational power, larger server appliances, stable internet connection, and information dissemination issues. Further challenges are spotted in the data results’ reproducibility, content legal aspects and ownership, and digital data history storage [30].

Geospatial visualizations such as Geographic Information Systems (GISs), which is used to facilitate interactive visual analysis of spatial data [33], is another heritage management methodology used to provide spatial data linked to a geographic area for 2D and 3D models. It further links it with available knowledge, creating thematic layers to analyze the architectural heritage conservation and management aspects [32]. Although GIS applications grow in popularity in architectural heritage management, they often face a set of challenges due to their broad functionality and inherent complexity. This highlights the need for implementing training programs for heritage experts, who might only use a specific portion of GISs’ features. Furthermore, the use of GISs is often limited to architectural surfaces that are almost at the same level, which hinders its applicability to more complex heritage buildings. Accordingly, managing high-resolution models’ characteristics of architectural heritage projects is another challenge [32].

The widely used methodology for heritage modeling to gather, arrange, and integrate building data into a single framework is BIM [15]. It is used as a tool and a system in heritage management. It is a process to control buildings in their lifecycle [15] and a way to generate 2D drawings [20]. It provides eight dimensions for the project data, starting with 2D drawings, 3D virtual replicas, 4D time data, 5D cost data, 6D sustainability-related data, 7D management data, and 8D safety data. Thus, project cost analysis, time schedules, facility management, sustainability analysis, and safety level analysis are among its capabilities [34]. Such capabilities accelerated its adoption in heritage digitalization and led to the creation of Historic Building Information Modeling (HBIM) [35]. Meanwhile, HBIM emerged to introduce BIM advantages to the heritage sector; it provides digital documentation for the targeted objects through parametric modeling approaches, along with creating spatial coordination and 3D visualization in an efficient manner [35]. Moreover, creating an accurate and detailed 3D model entails large amounts of data, which in turn increases the need for information technology requirements [34]. Other concerns could arise while implementing BIM in the documentation of existing buildings since its fundamental target is new buildings [15]. Also, its implementation requires a high level of expertise and is considered difficult and time-consuming [15]. In short, HBIM is an efficient method for compiling documentation with the ability to be updated continuously, ensuring proper management, and bringing together all stakeholders and the interdisciplinary information pertaining to the object in an integrated environment.

What is in common in the mentioned methodologies is their role in enhancing the management process by improving digitized, accessible, and updated heritage data in structured and collaborative information systems. Collectively, these methodologies enhance accessibility and decision-making for a broad spectrum of users; however, they each face challenges in terms of the technical aspects regarding the computational, networking, and training demands. This in turn affects their implementation flexibility in various heritage contexts globally.

2.1.3. Heritage Enhancement Methodologies

With the emergence of new technological advancements, cultural heritage may now reach new audiences that had previously dismissed it or shown little interest. Digital methodologies like 3D printing and XR technologies, which are represented by virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR), are now used in cultural heritage to provide improved explanations, introduce new ways of presenting knowledge, and facilitate more interaction over traditional techniques [36,37]. Such methodologies can produce digitally or physically any object with its real characteristics, contributing to improving heritage preservation and creating an immersive user experience [37]. Among these methodologies, XR is at the forefront. It refers to integrated physical and virtual realms via gamification, virtual museums through mobile apps, artifact reconstruction videos, heritage digitalization through online websites, creating a virtual tourism experience, and enhancing heritage education through AR applications [38]. VR methodology is also employed for cultural heritage documentation, reconstruction, and understanding [36]. It is increasingly being used for cultural heritage knowledge transmission and representation; it raises awareness of historical, social, and esthetic values [7]. Consequently, these methodologies offer improved ways of disseminating heritage knowledge for different purposes to support a deeper understanding of cultural heritage. For example, integrating these methodologies for cultural heritage presentation in museums introduces a dynamic level of experience and mitigates some problems associated with creating traditional exhibitions, such as limited spaces, foreign language constraints, the concept of borrowing rare artifacts, and cost [39]. Onsite and online applications for heritage sites as well are used to enhance but not replace the original experience, ensuring the maximum levels of cultural heritage knowledge accessibility [38]. Thus, the goal here is to achieve a balance between virtual and physical realities to maximize the opportunities for immersive experiences and engage users in interactive dialogs thereby enhancing heritage fruition.

Three-dimensional printing is also employed in cultural heritage, with its applications spanning both restoration and conservation purposes, as well as dissemination and accessibility initiatives [40]. It is used for research, documentation, and preservation [41]. Thus, its use is instrumental for the study and public understanding of cultural heritage to save heritage from disappearing and enhance its availability and accessibility for everyone. Three-dimensional replicas and physical reconstructions of heritage objects are now possible, allowing users to physically interact with valuable heritage objects [27]. Thus, a high degree of flexibility is obtained by means of 3D printing in comparison with traditional methods [41]. Three-dimensional printing technologies facilitate a multisensory cultural heritage experience while addressing conservation concerns, as 3D object replicas could be reconstructed and adjusted to an appropriate scale from the remaining pieces or other special materials in non-destructive methods. Among its other benefits, it ensures heritage accessibility for diverse audiences, including individuals with learning disabilities, visual impairments, the elderly, and children [40]. However, further research is needed to address the associated challenges with 3D printing applications in cultural heritage. For instance, the availability of suitable materials and the affordability of these 3D printing techniques affect their implementation in different contexts [40]. The lack of standards required to guarantee a successful information transfer and translation of heritage objects into multisensory 3D forms poses another challenge. This also sheds light on the importance of offering training programs. Further challenges are found in creating full-scale 3D physical replicas of large-scale objects, which cannot be printed in a single piece. Additionally, the technical characteristics of 3D printers impact the outcome quality [42]. Overall, 3D printing is becoming increasingly significant to enhance the fruition of cultural assets across the world by enabling the duplication of delicate objects that cannot be touched behind glass displays.

2.2. What Is the Correlation Between the Heritage Scale and the Used Technology?

Seven cases were selected to cover the diverse technologies used to record the different categories of the outstanding universal value of tangible cultural heritage, since digitalization is being used to recreate small heritage objects, monuments, and their missing parts, along with entire buildings or even entire urban heritage. In this regard, Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 were created for each case to cover the documentation operation, the used technology, the technology characteristics, the case parts, and the objective of digitization.

2.2.1. The Temple of Abu Simbel—Egypt

The Temple of Abu Simbel is one of the remarkable creations of Egyptian architecture. This temple was entirely carved out of solid rock. It consists of the Great Temple of Ramses II and the smaller Temple of Nefertari; they were inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1979 [43]. Its cultural heritage significance, along with the human and natural threats imposed on it, led to the necessity of digital documentation and creating a 3D digital model [43,44], as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Temple of Abu Simbel. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Laser scanner	The whole temple	[43]
	Photo-laser scanner
	GPS
	Terrestrial Laser Scanner (TLS)
Management	BIM
Enhancement	VR and AR

Table 1. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Temple of Abu Simbel. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Laser scanner	The whole temple	[43]
	Photo-laser scanner
	GPS
	Terrestrial Laser Scanner (TLS)
Management	BIM
Enhancement	VR and AR

2.2.2. The Colosseum—Italy

Although the Colosseum has suffered damage, primarily from earthquakes and stone thieves, it is still the largest remaining amphitheater in the world as a place that used to host gladiatorial games. It was declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1980 [45]. The digital documentation of the Colosseum has been carried out by a specialized research team. They created a 3D point cloud using information gathered by laser scanners [46]. The Colosseum was part of a 3D Web-GIS documentation project to reconstruct the Valley of the Colosseum and the Palatine Hill [47,48]. Table 2 illustrates the main technologies that were used to create a digital twin for the Colosseum.

Table 2. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Colosseum. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	LIDAR	Colosseum	[49]
	Panoramic photos and Spherical photogrammetry		[47]
	Arial photograph	Colosseum and the surrounding valley Colosseum and the surrounding valley	[48]
	TST		[46]
	GPS
	GIS		[48]
Enhancement	VR and AR		[47]

Table 2. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Colosseum. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	LIDAR	Colosseum	[49]
	Panoramic photos and Spherical photogrammetry		[47]
	Arial photograph	Colosseum and the surrounding valley Colosseum and the surrounding valley	[48]
	TST		[46]
	GPS
	GIS		[48]
Enhancement	VR and AR		[47]

2.2.3. The Parthenon—Greece

One of the strongest visual representations of antiquity that has survived to the modern day is the Parthenon, which is situated atop the Athenian Acropolis. It is part of the Acropolis, which is recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site [50]. Due to its values and the current situation and location of its sculptures, several efforts have been made to digitally reconstruct the Parthenon to acquire a renewed experience [51,52]. Another contribution has been made by the Department of Information and Education of the Acropolis Restoration Service (YSMA), which is an interdisciplinary committee of experts responsible for the conservation works on the Athenian Acropolis. Table 3 illustrates the technologies used to digitally reconstruct the Parthenon and its parts.

Table 3. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Parthenon. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Aerial photogrammetry	Acropolis of Athens site	[21]
	GPS and Total Station	All Parthenon parts	[52]
	Portable laser scanner	Parthenon frieze blocks and the Caryatids of the Erechtheion status	[52]
	Close-range photogrammetry		[21]
	Structured Light	Frieze, Mopes, and the Erechtheion	[52]
Enhancement	AR	Parthenon interiors and exteriors	[53]
	MR	Ancient Greek temple and the Parthenon Frieze
	VR	Parthenon and the whole Acropolis of Athens

Table 3. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Parthenon. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Aerial photogrammetry	Acropolis of Athens site	[21]
	GPS and Total Station	All Parthenon parts	[52]
	Portable laser scanner	Parthenon frieze blocks and the Caryatids of the Erechtheion status	[52]
	Close-range photogrammetry		[21]
	Structured Light	Frieze, Mopes, and the Erechtheion	[52]
Enhancement	AR	Parthenon interiors and exteriors	[53]
	MR	Ancient Greek temple and the Parthenon Frieze
	VR	Parthenon and the whole Acropolis of Athens

2.2.4. The Great Wall—China

The Great Wall is an ancient Chinese fortification structure that primarily consisted of walls as well as many beacon towers, enemy towers, and military castles. In 1987, the Great Wall was inscribed in the UNESCO World Heritage Site list as an outstanding, exceptional testimony built by humans among different civilizations as symbolic significance in the history of China [54]. Due to its geographical environment and human-induced threats, the Great Wall has experienced several conditions that impact its structural integrity [55]. Thus, digital documentation in these circumstances is a must to save the outstanding values in a proper manner. The enemy tower is one of the most complicated remaining wall components. Its interior consists of four arches in all directions as well as two tunnels in the heart of the building [55]. Since the great wall was built on harsh cliffs, the tower’s data are acquired by the integration of UAV for its exteriors and 3D scanning for its interiors [55], as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Great Wall of China. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Aerial photography	The Great Wall	[56]
	Panoramic photos
	UAV	Towers’ Exterior	[55]
	3D laser scanner with 360 degrees camera	Towers’ Interior
Enhancement	VR and AR	The Great Wall	[56]
	MR

Table 4. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of the Great Wall of China. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Aerial photography	The Great Wall	[56]
	Panoramic photos
	UAV	Towers’ Exterior	[55]
	3D laser scanner with 360 degrees camera	Towers’ Interior
Enhancement	VR and AR	The Great Wall	[56]
	MR

2.2.5. The Notre-Dame de Paris Cathedral—Paris

It is part of the World Heritage Site; Paris, Banks of the Seine, and an iconic French Gothic cathedral that has an artistic utilization of colored glass rosettes, vaults, buttresses, and ornamental sculptures. It was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1991 for its outstanding universal values in art, architecture, and history. On 15 April 2019, an immense fire attacked its outstanding structure and destroyed part of its roof and its iconic spire [57]. The catastrophe has proved the importance of digitalization. Thus, many efforts have been made to restore the destroyed parts. In this regard, digitalization is urgent since 3D digital models can provide an accurate and fast way to obtain exact measurements and techniques [10]. Table 5 illustrates the main technologies that were used to digitally reconstruct the cathedral and its parts.

Table 5. The various technologies used in the documentation of the Notre-Dame de Paris Cathedral. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Handheld optical tracked laser scanning system	South façade	[58]
	Photogrammetry	Whole Cathedral	[59]
	TLS
Management	BIM		[60]
	Aïoli (3D-based information system)		[30]
Enhancement	AR		[61]
	VR
	3D printing	Sculptures	[62]

Table 5. The various technologies used in the documentation of the Notre-Dame de Paris Cathedral. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	Handheld optical tracked laser scanning system	South façade	[58]
	Photogrammetry	Whole Cathedral	[59]
	TLS
Management	BIM		[60]
	Aïoli (3D-based information system)		[30]
Enhancement	AR		[61]
	VR
	3D printing	Sculptures	[62]

2.2.6. Petra—Jordan

The rock-cut Nabatean capital was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1985. As a consequence of the UNESCO Siq Stability Project, the Zamani research team documented and protected Petra over the course of three years to provide a new perspective on understanding the site. Due to the light conditions, GPS signal deficiency in some areas, physical complexity, time constraints, data volume, and high cost, unmanned aerial vehicles and close-range photogrammetry were not chosen to acquire data [63]. Thus, site conditions influence the choice of the technology used, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of Petra. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	TLS	The Siq and Al-Khazneh, the Great Temple, Qsar Al Bint, the Byzantine Church, the Royal Tombs, the Triclinium, Soldiers Tomb, Renaissance Tomb, Garden Tomb, and Columbarium	[64]
	GPS
	Close-range and spherical photogrammetry		[63]
	Arial Photograph	Site Terrain	[65]
	TLS
	GPS
Management	GIS	Petra archeological park area	[65]
Enhancement	VR and AR	Virtual tour of Petra	[65]

Table 6. The various technologies used in the digital documentation of Petra. Source: authors.

Operation	Technology/Methodology	Parts	Source
Surveying	TLS	The Siq and Al-Khazneh, the Great Temple, Qsar Al Bint, the Byzantine Church, the Royal Tombs, the Triclinium, Soldiers Tomb, Renaissance Tomb, Garden Tomb, and Columbarium	[64]
	GPS
	Close-range and spherical photogrammetry		[63]
	Arial Photograph	Site Terrain	[65]
	TLS
	GPS
Management	GIS	Petra archeological park area	[65]
Enhancement	VR and AR	Virtual tour of Petra	[65]

Accordingly, several efforts aim to bring heritage assets back to life through mapping heritage in 3D. Recently, mapping digital cultural heritage in Jordan (MaDiH) has contributed to the development of Jordan’s digital cultural heritage by identifying policies, standards, datasets, and key systems. It is a collaborative international project between the United Kingdom and Jordan, resulting from mobilizing the efforts of King’s Digital Lab, the Council for British Research in the Levant, the Hashemite University, the Department of Antiquities, the EMMANA project, and the Jordanian Open-Source Association. Its outputs are represented by open-access and open-source databases forming the comprehensive knowledge archive network catalog and social media accounts for public communication [66]. Other remarkable digitalization efforts in Jordan are covered by the mediterranean growth area through an innovation, modeling, and simulation (Med GAIMS) project, aiming to improve the tourism sector by adding gamification to the visitor experience. Med GAIMS intends to reimagine tourism as a journey in which exploration and education blend harmoniously, creating a memorable experience. Umm Qais and Ajloun Castle were selected to apply a gamification strategy for their sites [67]. Together, these endeavors form a more comprehensive framework for the preservation of digital heritage, one that promotes sustainable heritage conservation and management, in addition to the enhancement of cultural heritage knowledge understanding.

According to the cross-case analysis, different technologies could be used to survey on the same scale to achieve the same purpose. Thus, further explanation is needed to aid experts and stakeholders in selecting the appropriate technology for heritage digitalization. In this response, the SWOT survey, shown in

Table 7. Digital heritage documentation methodologies SWOT survey. Source: authors.

Methodology	Strength	Weakness	Opportunities	Threats	Source
Total Station Theodolite (TST)	Low-cost technique	Consumes time	On-site and buildings surveys	Complex geometries with non-linear ruins	[8,28,33,34,69,70]
	Accurate technique	Needs skilled operators	Measures vertical and horizontal angles, and sloping distances	Cannot be completed at the office without survey data
	Integrates with geospatial software	Inefficient in large areas	Produce 2D thematic maps and a 3D model
		Limited flexibility, portability, and applicability in small areas
Laser Scanner
Terrestrial Laser Scanner (TLS)	High data acquisition rate	Limited capability in acquiring texture and color data	Surveys simple objects and massive, intricate buildings	Affected by certain illumination conditions, weather conditions, and the surrounding environment	[6,8,22,27,33,71,72,73]
	Simple and accurate technique	Costly technique	Efficient in surveying complex forms	Hidden or obstructed areas issues
	Integrates with geospatial software	Needs a large memory card	Provides data in a variety of forms	Health and safety consequences
		Limited portability and flexibility
Vehicle-based mobile systems	Mobility	Large size	Used to survey historical streetscape areas	Affects the sensitive heritage sites	[28,71]
	Simplicity	Noisy
Handheld and backpack systems	Simple technique	Costly technique	Collecting data from inaccessible areas	Safety constraint while using laser source	[28,71]
	Accurate technique	Complex fieldwork
	Mobility
	High data acquisition rate
Photogrammetry
Panorama Photography	High data acquisition rate	Daylight, shadows consequences, and clean atmosphere	Utilized for heritage interpretation and tourism promotion	Needs to be stored in a large memory	[8,18,47,74,75,76]
	Simple and affordable technique	Needs a special processing software	Creates realistic, interactive replicas	Camera properties affect quality
	Time efficient technique	Low data acquisition rate
	Attractive and high-resolution results
	Integrates with geospatial software
Close-range Photogrammetry	Safe and secure option	Photos should be scattered around the surface	Utilized in sites with limited accessibility	Camera properties influence the outcome quality	[6,8,34,36,71,77,78]
	Cost-effective technique	Sophisticated system	Covers heritage sites, buildings, interiors, and small objects	Physical obstacles could limit its applicability
	Deals with different levels of complexity efficiently	Needs skilled operators		Affected by the distance between the camera and the target
	Offers vector and metric data	Uniform textures constitute a real issue		Affected by the atmospheric circumstances
	Gives color and texture details	Sparse data coverage
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) Photogrammetry	Low-cost technique	Short battery life	Used to survey heritage sites	Needs Pilot accreditation	[8,10,18,21,25,34,77,79,80,81,82]
	Time efficient and safe technique	Needs costly software	Creates a highly accurate 3D model	Privacy invasion and legislation
	Obtain high-spatial-resolution data	Maintenance costs	Used for low-budget projects	Restricted airspaces
	Covers dangerous and inaccessible areas	Hindered by weather conditions, darkness, and obstacles		Complex information processing
	Different UAVs typologies
Infrared Thermography (IRT)
Pulsed infrared thermography	Combines 3D models and RGB images	Needs a high level of skilled users	Used to examine the state of the objects	Complex information processing	[6,8,83,84,85]
	High accuracy, mobility, and real-time interpretation		Analyzes objects’ compositions
Hybrid
Photo-laser scanner	High-quality and textured 3D digital models	Costly technique	Accuracy while recording an object’s edges and cracks	Complex information processing	[8,86]
	Fast, accurate, and efficient technique	Needs additional equipment and specialized software	Survey complex objects with color and texture details	Large amount of data
Structured Light	High-accuracy 3D model in a short time	Requires skilled users and operators	Surveys small- and medium-sized objects	Complicated software system	[8,73]
	Offers several types		Used in narrow spaces
	Safe, simple, and cost-effective technique
Aerial Photograph	Survey of large areas within a short time	Low spatial resolution	Provides a bird’s- eye view of the heritage sites	Affected by lack of coordinates and lens distortion	[87]
	Low-cost technique	Print quality issues	Captures and detects the small changes in the earth’s surface
			Upgradability
Spectral Imaging	Detect compositional changes, uncover underdrawings, and expose prior conservation treatments	Creating 3D objects requires its integration with other 3D imaging techniques	Records the state of the object, guides its maintenance, and improves its scientific knowledge	Obstacles present, image degradation, and spatial resolution affect its capabilities	[87]
Synthetic Aperture Radar	High spatial resolution for wide spatial coverage	Requires skilled operators	Detects buried heritage sites in various regions	Complicated information processing	[87,88]
	Cost-effective and efficient technique		Monitors deformation and natural hazards
	Works in all weather conditions or at night		Detects the anthropogenic actions		[87]
Airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR)	High rate of data acquisition from large area in seconds	Requires skilled operators	Allows us to record, document, and monitor heritage sites	Its accuracy affected by various obstacles	[8,33,87]
	Realistic surface models	Costly technique	Works on both landscape and site scales	GNSS inaccuracies and noise can affect its systems
	High-quality and accurate data	High density data

, was needed to clarify the various technologies, characteristics, applicability, possible end products, and pros and cons. The use of a SWOT analysis in the context of this study is justified by its employment in prior studies for UAVs [24], laser scanning, and photogrammetry [68] use in the field of heritage digitalization, enabling the assessment of situation.

Based on the SWOT survey and the previous studies mentioned in Section 2.1.1,

Table 8. Digital documentation methodologies selection parameters. Source: authors.

Parameter	Sub-Parameter
Documentation objectives	Target scale, digitalization target, applicability
Objects’ characteristics	Object’s size, spatial shape, detail, accessibility, complexity, condition, structural integrity, color, texture, material, and significance
Environmental factors	Lighting conditions, weather conditions
Physical context characteristics	Natural obstacles, trees, open areas
Technological capabilities	Accuracy, output quality, precision, texture and detail acquisition, resolution, adherence to standards
Financial constraints	Cost, maintenance, required skills and software cost
Time considerations	Productivity, efficiency, real-time interpretation, speed of workflow
Safety consequences	Health, laser radiation, non-destructive
Resource requirements	Equipment’s availability, portability, flexibility, mobility, complexity

identifies the parameters that could be used to conduct a comparative evaluation between the different digital documentation methodologies thereby facilitating the decision-making process.

Through digitized heritage, a wide range of technologies are utilized for documenting cultural heritage. This involves achieving multi-documentation dimensions as the priority, including planning, conservation, education, and heritage tourism applications. As such, these goals could be obtained through smart heritage management. Considering this, the following section clarifies the role of digitized heritage technologies in the smart fruition of cultural heritage.

2.3. Correlation Between Digitized Heritage Technology and Scale

In order to help heritage experts gain a better understanding of the latest technologies utilized in the digital heritage documentation process, shown in

Table 9. Correlation between heritage digitalization technology and scale. Source: authors.

Methodologies	Spatial Scale
	Object Scale/Interiors	On-Site Scale	Off-Site Scale
Surveying
GIS	Limited applicability	High applicability	Highest applicability
GPS	Limited applicability	In open-to-sky areas	In clear sites with no obstacles
TST	Applicable	Applicable	Not applicable
3D-laser Scanning	Covered by handheld scanners	Covered by TLS	Covered by airborne laser scanners
Photogrammetry	Covered by spherical and close-range photogrammetry	Covered by spherical and close-range photogrammetry	Covered by aerial photogrammetry using UAVs technology
IRT	Highest applicability	High applicability	Not applicable
Photo-laser Scanner	Highest applicability	High applicability	Not applicable
Structured Light	Highest applicability	High applicability	Not applicable
RS Technologies	Covered by Spectral Imaging	Covered by arial photograph and LIDAR technologies	Covered by arial photograph, SAR, and LIDAR technologies
Management
BIM	High applicability	High applicability	Applicable
GIS	Limited applicability	High applicability	Highest applicability
Enhancement
XR	High applicability	High applicability	Applicable
3D Printing	Highest applicability	High applicability	Applicable

(1) Object scale: encompasses artifacts, statues, and certain building features or parts. (2) On-site scale: encompasses entire building or certain surfaces of building like facades. (3) Off-site scale: encompasses entire landscape.

, it is essential to select the appropriate technique based on the needs of the end user for data and the objective of the work since workflow flexibility is influenced by making the appropriate decisions.

As derived from the cross-case and SWOT analysis above, creating a well-designed digital heritage documentation plan necessitates determining the documentation operation and its intended objectives as well as selecting the appropriate technologies, considering several influential factors. Firstly, the scale of documentation plays a vital role in determining the efficiency, accuracy, data quality, geometrical precision, and level of detail, whether it is the object scale, which encompasses artifacts, statues, or specific building features; the on-site scale, which includes entire buildings or specific surfaces; or the off-site scale, such as entire landscapes. Furthermore, the nature of tangible heritage objects encompasses the complexity of architectural heritage, its physical state, texture, and color correctness. Moreover, budgetary and time constraints are critical considerations in the trade-off between the various technological advancements. Technology’s safety, portability, skill requirements, software compatibility, adherence to standards, and environmental impact also influence the choice of documentation technologies. Subsequently, heritage digitalization involves the utilization of a wide range of technologies tailored to the specific scale and characteristics of the tangible heritage being documented. In essence, the underlying correlation between heritage category, scale, and the used technology is rooted in the necessity to align heritage technologies and operations with the specific attributes of different scales of heritage with the characteristics of the used technology. This correlation recognizes that varying scales of heritage possess distinct management plans.

Accordingly, to promote global heritage management plans and enable local authorities, planners, and heritage experts in making well-informed decisions in the digitized heritage process, the following set of recommendations are made for incorporating digitization into smart heritage fruition:

• Develop best practices and establish specialized standards, for instance, guidelines should be developed to select the appropriate digitalization technologies or methodologies considering documentation scale, object characteristics, environmental factors, and desired outcomes. Doing so assists decision-makers with aligning their choices to specific heritage needs, ensuring the outcome’s quality and allowing for comprehensive documentation.
• Identify and use multi-scalar documentation frameworks that classify digitized heritage work into object, on-site, and off-site scales. With this approach, digital surveying technologies/methodologies might be applied in distinct ways and customized to meet the unique requirements of heritage projects, whether they are for a single object or an entire landscape. This in turn contributes to maximizing benefits and minimizing potential risks during the digital heritage documentation process.
• Invest in capacity building through training and skill development. Skilled operators are required for inclusive heritage digitization. Creating focused training programs for heritage experts in digital tools, software, and methodologies might enhance productivity and quality, allowing experts to confidently manage several heritage situations. Specialized training in modern digital methodologies, such as HBIM, GIS, and other 3D software, is required to maintain uniform standards across projects. Thus, this strategy supports heritage management and fruition by providing experts with the essential skills needed to handle challenging digitization tasks efficiently.
• Promote interoperability and enhance data integration. Advance data-sharing protocols and assure interoperability with digital platforms like GIS, BIM, and XR to facilitate smooth information accessibility, management, and understanding, allowing for thorough analysis and visualization to aid in informed decision-making.
• Adopt low-cost, low-maintenance digitalization tools that are adjusted for local financial constraints and resource availability. By encouraging sustainable technological options, digitized heritage preservation affordability could be enhanced and thereby applied on a global scale.
• Establish a global network to exchange standards and best practices in the process of digitized heritage transformation.

Through digitized heritage, a wide range of technologies are utilized for documenting cultural heritage. This involves achieving multi-documentation dimensions as the priority, including planning, conservation, education, and heritage tourism applications. As such, these goals could be obtained through smart heritage management. Considering this, the following section clarifies the role of digitized heritage technologies in management and the smart fruition of cultural heritage.

2.4. What Is the Relationship Between Digitized Heritage and Smart Fruition?

Smart heritage occurs when smart technology and heritage overlap to deliver a unique and autonomous heritage experience by employing ICT to facilitate interactive information between people, media, and objects [89]. The significance of smart heritage lies in its capability to connect different stakeholders, including communities, institutions, and experts, to harness the needed efforts with the proper means that prioritize the inclusive preservation of cultural heritage [11]. Therefore, smart heritage is a relationship and a link between users of shared digital platforms, institutions, objects, visitors, and the actual and virtual worlds on both ends [90]. Therefore, digital heritage is considered a precondition for the creation of smart heritage. Thus, heritage smartness is achieved by the utilization of several cutting-edge technologies, allowing for the combination of both stakeholders and diverse services to collect and share cultural heritage information. Eventually, a smart cultural heritage environment entails the introduction of various technologies into heritage sites, museums, and monuments. Applying smart solutions encompasses the establishment of a user-friendly, open, and accessible platform and a heritage-related 3D visualization and real-time data platform. Combining BIM with other spatial data makes the process of building conservation and decision-making more rational [91]. BIM’s parametric dimension allows the creation of smart objects such as building materials and other attributes. Thus, BIM plays a crucial role in smart heritage decision-making, ensuring that heritage digitalization is the essence of smart heritage. In conclusion, smart heritage enables cultural heritage values and knowledge to be gained and transferred in an interactive manner. Smart heritage focuses on implementing more collaborative and interactive methods, making cultural data openly accessible, and subsequently expanding the possibilities for digital curation, interpretation, and innovation [33]. Here, ICT may support the emergence of new methods for smart heritage recording, interpretation, and presentation [12]. However, smart heritage may also be used as a management tool to address the issues of cultural heritage protection in three stages: pre-conservation, conservation, and post-conservation [89]. For the purpose of this study, smart heritage management focuses more on heritage fruition by enhancing its understanding and facilitating its digitized dissemination process.

Cultural heritage management with respect to conservation and restoration is achieved by the purposeful utilization of surveying and management methodologies to sustainably protect cultural heritage. The data obtained from any heritage site falls under one of four categories: heritage data, geometry, pathology, and performance data [25]. Heritage data are obtained to understand buildings’ historical backgrounds, typologies, and functions. Geometry data are captured to present the condition of the building’s precise shape, appearance, and attributes. Pathology data reflect the historic building’s alterations over time, considering the material quality and the structural system. Performance data are about collecting environmental data, including thermal comfort, indoor air quality, moisture survey, lighting/visual, acoustic, and energy performance [25]. Such processes involve interdisciplinary work from different sectors like heritage, museology, art, history, conservation, computer science, management, and communication [92]. Eventually, all the data are interpreted to achieve one dimension of management: cultural heritage conservation and restoration, which start with the physical preservation of the cultural asset. Such cultural heritage values are transmitted and accessible by various end users. The local community however contributes precious cultural heritage knowledge needed to enhance the management process [93]. Tourists, on the other hand, could see and interpret heritage values through a different lens by experiencing the heritage layers produced by the local community [93]. Adopting such a participatory concept empowers the role of the local community with respect to addressing local heritage issues and developing distinctive ways to showcase the heritage, promote its accessibility [92], and create collaborative digital heritage projects [19]. In the context of this research, experts from related disciplines, tourists, and the local community are the main stakeholders in any digital heritage intervention. Thus, a participatory design approach to smart heritage fruition is seen in the collaboration between interdisciplinary teams to develop creative, sustainable, and inclusive solutions by understanding end users’ needs and expectations [19]. Despite its potential, participatory design in smart heritage management faces challenges, including conflicting expectations, knowledge gaps, and coordination issues [92].

On the other end of the spectrum, smart heritage fruition demonstrations in the dissemination and understanding dimension are found in the explanations of heritage awareness, education, and tourism. For instance, cultural heritage awareness is about having trustworthy cultural heritage knowledge in the public sphere, which could encourage the public to take an active role in the management process through different technologies [94], such as XR applications, by activating the interactive role of users [9]. In cultural heritage education, technological advancement with respect to virtual recreations of heritage with their magnificent values open new avenues for experiential learning in all subject areas by allowing interactivity and facilitating the placement of the artifacts in their historical context [14,27] in order to provide an additional explanation in an enjoyable, creative, and attractive manner [94]. In addition, XR technology itself permits narrative telling and promotes tourism through an unprecedented and memorable user experience [7] by following multiple dimensions for integrating the smart technologies [95]. Furthermore, it extends the possibilities provided by conventional tourist experiences through online platforms, allowing disabled and elderly people to live in a virtual replica of a real tourist destination [96]. Digital heritage through a virtual tourism experience is capable of better visualizing heritage values and establishing new ways of experiencing heritage [97]. In the context of this research, interdisciplinary experts, tourists, and the local community are the main stakeholders in any digital heritage intervention.

3. Results

Data acquisition and capturing of heritage sites, buildings, and objects could be obtained by diverse technologies. Thus, it is not an easy task; it requires careful determination of the underlined goal of the survey process and well-structured knowledge about the several means and methods available today in the evolving field of architectural surveys. Once a three-dimensional digital database is produced, a row of digital material is created for heritage conservation, dissemination, and understanding. The sum of the mentioned surveying technologies falls under capturing and creating 3D replicas for tangible cultural heritage. Capturing architectural heritage is an introductory step to cultural heritage management. Following a thorough search of the body of published information, it was concluded that documentation in heritage digitalization across the different study cases encompasses two main stages with different possible outputs, as shown in Figure 3.

The initial step is data acquisition from the diverse available sources for the targeted heritage objects using the various digital heritage documentation technologies. The next stage is about creating 3D digital models using different software. In this step, the 3D replicas could be constructed with BIM to add other related cultural heritage data in order to create a collaborative platform for combining all stakeholders with the value-extracted information, allowing for further management processes. Conducting these two steps ensures the continuous and sustainable management of cultural heritage objects. A further extension could be made by using the values obtained from the data and the virtual 3D models in other enhancement methodologies like XR and 3D printing, leading to enhancing the understanding of cultural heritage knowledge in the various fields.

Digitalized Heritage Technologies and Smart Fruition

Technological advancements offer significant opportunities to improve the management of heritage sites. Such integration is an essential step forward in heritage digitalization thereby promoting smart heritage fruition. The relationship between documentation technologies, heritage digitization, and smart fruition is interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Digital heritage documentation is often a precursor to digitized heritage; it provides the foundational data needed for digital preservation and analysis. Digital heritage documentation technologies provide the means to capture, record, manage, and present heritage assets in digital formats, while heritage digitalization facilitates the creation of heritage material replicas in digital repositories to be stored, managed, and disseminated. Smart heritage fruition then utilizes these digital heritage resources and connects them with IoT and ICT technologies to implement easily accessible, collaborative, and innovative strategies for cultural heritage understanding and dissemination. Accordingly, the relationship between heritage digitalization and smart heritage fruition is complementary and symbiotic. Eventually, smart heritage fruition leverages data analytics to derive insights from digitized heritage data, allowing experts to make evidence-based decisions at theoretical and practical levels of cultural heritage management. In the context of this study, Figure 4 demonstrates the proposed definition of smart fruition and its relationship with digitized heritage.

Accordingly, heritage digitalization is a precondition of smart heritage, and smart heritage understanding is a precondition of smart heritage fruition and enhancement. It could be concluded that smart heritage fruition covers two main dimensions: cultural heritage understanding and dissemination. Figure 5 demonstrates the relationship between heritage documentation technologies and smart fruition dimensions.

4. Discussion

Digital technologies enhance the protection of architectural heritage, allowing for the creation of interactive, public platforms for cultural heritage management. Such technologies support education, conservation, awareness-raising, social responsibility, and tourism growth. The goal is to maximize the accessibility of heritage management in a dynamic manner [16]. Thus, smart heritage management entails adopting both theoretical and practical improvements to protect cultural heritage and build an innovative public service system [33,89]. Accordingly, there is a need for efforts beyond digitization, focusing more on the social dimension by activating the collaborative role of stakeholders in cultural heritage management [98]. Communication networks like the IoT should be employed to link heritage digitalization technologies with urban components in order to achieve conservation goals. The focus here is to establish an effective and responsive management system [22]. Therefore, through the introduction of creative solutions to create unorthodox pathways of discovery, where the virtual and physical worlds interact seamlessly, digital technologies have the potential to revitalize cultural heritage sites and improve social engagement, enhancing the visitor experience and fostering a deeper understanding of cultural heritage knowledge [99]. Appropriately, each of these studies focused on one aspect of management without elucidating its role in enhancing heritage fruition and its relationship with the involved stakeholders and the used technologies or methodologies. This study contributes to the field by presenting an inclusive understanding of smart heritage fruition framework, which is an ongoing process that entails the provision of cultural heritage data, digital heritage documentation methodologies, heritage management methodologies, heritage understanding methodologies, and the IoT as a specialized subset of ICT that deals with the connectivity of physical items to the internet, to understand and enhance heritage knowledge through a collaboration platform to grasp the interest of involved experts, local communities, and tourists to ensure their proper interconnection, as shown in Figure 6.

Notably, the overarching aim of digitized heritage is to fulfill sustainable development goals encompassing environmental, economic, and social sustainability to create cultural heritage bonds [99]. Digital heritage application in heritage site management has transformative potential for driving economic sustainability [100]. This study underscores how the integration of technological innovation can stimulate a creative solution in the heritage management process, bolstering the economic vitality of local communities, enhancing the economic efficiency of tourists’ experiences, fostering the establishment of creative industries, and promoting new tourism maps. The findings of this study underscore the significance of technology-led participation within heritage management, emphasizing its role in fostering deeper connections and social cohesion among the involved stakeholders, aiming to encourage stronger social ties and interdisciplinary collaborations. The collaborative efforts between all involved stakeholders contribute to enhancing social sustainability [98]. Digitalization serves as a protective measure for heritage sites, creating virtual replicas to safeguard their values against climate change impacts [96]. Digitization has become more and more important in heritage fruition initiatives to increase accessibility to cultural heritage sites, providing immersive and meaningful experiences [99].

This study delved exclusively into the role of digital technologies in the smart fruition of architectural heritage. While acknowledging the significance of intangible cultural heritage, such as oral traditions, performing arts, rituals, and social practices, this study narrows its scope to the smart fruition of digital architectural heritage. Thus, future studies could explore the connection between intangible heritage, digital documentation technologies, and smart fruition. Additionally, based on the findings of this study, future research could survey the current situation, and the level of digitized heritage applied in developing countries such as Jordan by taking a local case study like Umm Qais. Doing so allows researchers to explore how concepts such as digitized heritage and smart fruition could be adopted in different contexts considering both developed and developing countries’ natures.

5. Conclusions

Digital heritage documentation through smart technology is the driving force behind smart heritage fruition. The concept is still in its infancy thus it is currently being explored by academia in order to identify and clarify its framework. For instance, cultural heritage protection might happen today with the use of current technical breakthroughs to achieve better heritage understanding and dissemination. A variety of technologies might be used to collect data about cultural heritage sites, buildings, and objects. Therefore, it is not simple work; it calls for a rigorous selection of the survey process highlighted targets as well as organized knowledge of the many tools and procedures that are now accessible in the developing field of architectural management technologies.

Cultural heritage data are the essence of the whole management and fruition process. Such data, including heritage data, geometry, pathology, and performance data, are distributed among relevant stakeholders to fulfill the heritage management process, which depends on finding the appropriate matrices between the key objectives, the engaged stakeholders, and smart improvements. Successful smart heritage fruition should follow technology-led participation to establish each possible stakeholder’s identification and legitimacy. Smart cultural heritage understanding and dissemination is explicit in the utilization of diverse enhancement methodologies to provide the public and tourists around the world with open and available access to cultural heritage knowledge. Raising cultural heritage awareness among the public guarantees their active participation in the smart heritage fruition process. By means of smart technologies, interactive, participatory platforms might be used to manage cultural heritage and harness the interests of all involved stakeholders, with a greater focus on public and tourist preferences. Thus, local, private, voluntary, and public efforts should all work together in this digitally integrated environment to ensure the success of smart heritage fruition by balancing technology-driven and participant-driven approaches. Consequently, the core of the smart heritage fruition process is the smart collaboration between all involved parties to better manage heritage values through ICT media and IoT networks.