This study offers a global overview of the presence and visibility of web information on UNESCO World Heritage located in Mexico, via the analysis of official websites and Web 2.0 information. Cultural heritage is a determining factor in linking people to their history, and contributes to increasing cultural tourism and economic development. The study starts from the hypothesis that the design of these websites has an influence on the dissemination and popularity of the aforementioned heritage. The relationships between the administrative organization of the country and Internet protocols are compared. A webometric study of the official Mexican websites was carried out. An evaluation sheet was designed to allow the assessment of aspects relating to identification, presence, accessibility and content. The multilingual nature of this information and its presence on social networks and Wikipedia was analysed. The analysis of URLs confirms that the domain .mx is used in 84% of cases. The results indicate a noticeable use of Web 2.0 dissemination of the heritage assets on YouTube (51%) and Facebook (40%), followed by 23% on Twitter. The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines are not yet frequently applied. Finally, the results obtained make it possible to identify variables that can contribute to improvements in the visibility and dissemination of official web information.
Bermúdez-TamayoCJiménez-PernettJGarcía GutiérrezJFAzpilicueta CengotitobengoaISilva-CastroMMBabioGPlazaola CastañoJ (2006) Cuestionario para evaluar sitios web sanitarios según criterios europeos. Atención Primaria38(5): 268–274.
3.
ChengXDaleCLiuJ (2008) Statistics and social network of YouTube videos. In: IWQoS 2008 Proceedings of the 16th International Workshop on Quality of Service, Enschede, Netherlands2-4 June 2008, pp.229–238. IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/IWQOS.2008.32
4.
ChungTLawR (2003) Developing a performance indicator for hotel websites. International Journal of Hospitality Management22(1): 119–125.
5.
CiolekTM (1996) The six quests for the electronic grail: Current approaches to information quality in WWW resources. Revue informatique et statistique dans les sciences humaines (RISSH) (32): 1–4. Available at: www.ciolek.com/PAPERS/six-quests1996.html (accessed 10 February 2016).
6.
CodinaL (2008) Evaluación de Calidad en Sitios Web: Metodología De Proyectos de Análisis Sectoriales y de Realización de Auditorías. Barcelona: UPF, Área de Biblioteconomía y Documentación, Departamento de Periodismo y Comunicación Audiovisual, Madrid. Available at: www.lluiscodina.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/procedimientos2008.pdf (accessed 10 June 2016).
7.
DeveceCLapiedraRPalaciosD (2014) Website effectiveness for tourism accommodation companies. In: Gil-PechuánIPalacios-MarquésDPeris-OrtizMPVendrellEFerri-RamirezC.Strategies in E-Business. US: Springer, pp.55–65.
8.
DragulanescuNG (2002) Website quality evaluations: criteria and tools. International Information & Library Review34 (3): 247–254.
9.
Gordon-MurnaneL (1999) Evaluating net evaluators. Searcher7(2): 57–66.
10.
HalpennyEAArellanoAStuartSA (2016) The use and impact of World Heritage designation by Canadian Heritage sites: an exploratory media analysis. In: BourdeauLGravari-BarbasM.RobinsonM. (eds.) World Heritage, Tourism and Identity: Inscription and Co-production. New York: Routledge, pp.25–36.
11.
HarperSChenAQ (2012) Web accessibility guidelines. World Wide Web15(1): 61–88.
12.
HidalgoMJLGómezAARuizMSRodríguezGGMLázaroGA (2010) ¿Cómo son las páginas webs de los laboratorios farmacéuticos dirigidas a los usuarios?Atención Primaria42(5): 273–277.
13.
HuMLimEPSunALauwHWVuongBQ (2007) Measuring article quality in Wikipedia: models and evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Lisbon, Portugal, 6-10 November 2007, pp.243–252. New York: ACM.
14.
HuangCHTsaurJRYangCH (2012) Does world heritage list really induce more tourists?: Evidence from Macau. Tourism Management33(6): 1450–1457.
15.
IsmailJALabropoulosTMillsJEMorrisonA (2001). A snapshot in time: the marketing of culture in European Union NTO web sites. Tourism Culture & Communication3(3): 165–179.
16.
Jiménez PernettJGarcía GutiérrezJFBermúdez TamayoC (2009) Accesibilidad de sitios web sobre salud para mayores. Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 44(6): 342–348. DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.regg.2009.07.001.
17.
Jiménez-PianoMOrtíz-Repiso JiménezV (2007) Evaluación y Calidad de Sedes Web. Trea, Gijón.
KaplanAMHaenleinM (2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons53(1): 59–68.
20.
LawRQiSBuhalisD (2010) Progress in tourism management: A review of website evaluation in tourism research. Tourism Management31(3): 297–313.
21.
Macías-ChapulaCAMendoza-GuerreroJARodea-CastroIPJuárez-SánchezEGutiérrez-CarrascoA (2007) Actividades de investigación y desarrollo en hospitales de América Latina y el Caribe, identificadas a través de sus sitios Web. Revista Española de Documentación Científica30(4): 503–22.
22.
MeleEDe AscaniisSCantoniL (2015) Localization of national tourism organizations’ websites: How are World Heritage sites portrayed online by European destinations for different markets? In: Proceedings: Heritage Tourism & Hospitality: international conference (eds. GoFAvarezMDLaarseREgbertsL) Amsterdam, 24-27 November 2015. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: CLUE+ Research Institute/Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, pp.149–158.
23.
Olvera-LoboMDAguilar-SotoM (2011) Los sitios web académicos con información de postgrado: herramientas para su evaluación. Investigación Bibliotecológica53 (25): 31–57.
24.
Olvera-LoboMDAguilar-SotoMRuiz-de-OsmaE (2012) Evaluación de sitios Web de postgrados biomédicos en España. Transinformaçao24(1): 47–60.
ProvidentiMZaiRIII (2007) Web accessibility at academic libraries: standards, legislation and enforcement. Library Hi Tech25(4): 494–508.
27.
RussellJMAinsworthSDíaz-AguilarJ (2012) Web visibility or wasted opportunity? Case studies from Mexican research institutes. Aslib Proceedings64(1): 67–82. DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1108/00012531211196710 (accessed 24 April 2016).
28.
SchiederTAdukaiteACantoniL (2014) Mobile apps devoted to UNESCO World Heritage sites: a map. In: Proceedings of the International Conference in Dublin Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, Dublin, Ireland, 21–24 January 2014; pp. 17–29. Switzerland: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-03973-2_1.
29.
Sistema para el Desarrollo Integral de la Familia Ciudad de México (2013) Juntos por la inclusión: Portal Con Acceso a Personas con Discapacidad. Available at: www.dif.df.gob.mx/dif/nota_dinamica.php?v=273 (accessed 22 April 2016).
30.
ThelwallM (2014) Big Data and Social Web Research Methods. An updated and extended version of the book: Introduction to Webometrics. Includes chapters to appear in a forthcoming social web methods book. This updated book was previously called: Webometrics and social web research methods. Available at: www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/∼cm1993/papers/IntroductionToWebometricsAndSocialWebAnalysis.pdf, (accessed 06 July 2016).
31.
ThelwallMVannKFaircloughR (2006) Web issue analysis: An integrated water resource management case study. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology57(10): 1303–1314.
32.
UNESCO (2016a) World Heritage Convention: The criteria for selection. Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/criteria/ (accessed 24 October 2016).
ValčičMDomšićL (2012) Information technology for management and promotion of sustainable cultural tourism. Informatica36(2): 131–136.
35.
WareJKleinMNelsonML (2011) An evaluation of link neighborhood lexical signatures to rediscover missing web pages. Technical report, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, 4 February. Available at: arxiv.org/pdf/1102.0930v1.pdf (accessed 24 February 2016).
36.
WattenhoferMWattenhoferRZhuZ (2012) The YouTube social network. In: Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, ICWSM, Dublin, Ireland, 4-7 June 2012. Dublin, Ireland: Trinity College. Available at: static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/es//pubs/archive/37738.pdf (accessed 24 April 2016).
