Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.010173016 = product of:
  0.040692065 = sum of:
    0.040692065 = weight(_text_:social in 4808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040692065 = score(doc=4808,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 4808, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4808)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This talk focuses on the relationship between subject classification and 'Web of data' trends around RDF, OWL and SKOS. In particular it sketches ways in which factual and ontological data can be used alongside subject classification and on the practical possibilities this creates for collaboration amongst vocabulary and dataset maintainers, and in user-facing applications. Although factual ontologies and subject classification systems typically serve different purposes, they often overlap in topical coverage and are can all be expressed using shared underlying 'Web of data' technologies, such as RDF. With each passing week, new datasets-whether scientific, library, cultural heritage, governmental or social-are published as 'linked data', with ROE vocabularies, OWL ontologies and SKOS schemes as the representational 'glue' that holds the whole thing together. Factual representations of people, places and things serve as bridges between the subject classification world and the world of general Web data. Despite this, we have not yet collectively produced 'best practice' guidance that show how such linkage can be created, curated and exploited using practical, modern Web tools. A goal of this talk is to motivate such collaboration, and to suggest some priorities for the short and medium term.

0.0045745755 = product of:
  0.018298302 = sum of:
    0.018298302 = product of:
      0.036596604 = sum of:
        0.036596604 = weight(_text_:aspects in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036596604 = score(doc=517,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.17478286 = fieldWeight in 517, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=517)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

"Textual content-based search engines for the web have a number of limitations. Firstly, many web resources have little or no textual content (images, audio or video streams etc.) Secondly, precision is low where natural language terms have overloaded meaning (e.g. 'bank', 'watch', 'chip' etc.) Thirdly, recall is incomplete where the search does not take account of synonyms or quasi-synonyms. Fourthly, there is no basis for assisting a user in modifying (expanding, refining, translating) a search based on the meaning of the original search. Fifthly, there is no basis for searching across natural languages, or framing search queries in terms of symbolic languages. The Semantic Web is a framework for creating, managing, publishing and searching semantically rich metadata for web resources. Annotating web resources with precise and meaningful statements about conceptual aspects of their content provides a basis for overcoming all of the limitations of textual content-based search engines listed above. Creating this type of metadata requires that metadata generators are able to refer to shared repositories of meaning: 'vocabularies' of concepts that are common to a community, and describe the domain of interest for that community.