Search (77 results, page 4 of 4)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Semantic Web"
  1. Maltese, V.; Farazi, F.: Towards the integration of knowledge organization systems with the linked data cloud (2011) 0.01
    0.0073026326 = product of:
      0.014605265 = sum of:
        0.014605265 = product of:
          0.02921053 = sum of:
            0.02921053 = weight(_text_:classification in 4815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02921053 = score(doc=4815,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4815, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4815)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
  2. Pattuelli, C.; Rubinow, S.: ¬The knowledge organization of DBpedia : a case study (2013) 0.01
    0.0073026326 = product of:
      0.014605265 = sum of:
        0.014605265 = product of:
          0.02921053 = sum of:
            0.02921053 = weight(_text_:classification in 1776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02921053 = score(doc=1776,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 1776, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1776)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper investigates the semantic structure underlying DBpedia, one of the largest and most heavily used datasets in the current Linked Open Data (LOD) landscape. The analysis attempts to shed light on this new type of knowledge organization tool. Design/methodology/approach - The research followed a case study methodology to analyze DBpedia using the domain of jazz as the application scenario. Findings - The study reveals an evolving knowledge organization tool where different descriptive and classification approaches are employed concurrently. The semantic constructs employed in the DBpedia knowledge base vary significantly in terms of their degree of formalization, stability, cohesiveness and consistency. As such, they challenge the tolerance threshold for data quality and the traditional notion of authority control. Research limitations/implications - The analysis is conducted on a limited portion of a large knowledge base. Initial findings provide a basis for further research and study. Practical implications - Revealing the knowledge organization underlying DBpedia increases the understanding of its power, its limitations and its implications for the new semantic context provided by LOD. Having an understanding of the range of entities and properties available enables LOD users to formulate queries with higher precision. Originality/value - This study is the first conducted from the perspective of the knowledge organization community.
  3. Piscitelli, F.A.: Library linked data models : library data in the Semantic Web (2019) 0.01
    0.0073026326 = product of:
      0.014605265 = sum of:
        0.014605265 = product of:
          0.02921053 = sum of:
            0.02921053 = weight(_text_:classification in 5478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02921053 = score(doc=5478,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5478, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5478)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 57(2019) no.5, S.261-277
  4. Miles, A.; Matthews, B.; Beckett, D.; Brickley, D.; Wilson, M.; Rogers, N.: SKOS: A language to describe simple knowledge structures for the web (2005) 0.01
    0.007229238 = product of:
      0.014458476 = sum of:
        0.014458476 = product of:
          0.028916951 = sum of:
            0.028916951 = weight(_text_:classification in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028916951 = score(doc=517,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.17416364 = fieldWeight in 517, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=517)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    This type of effort is common in the digital library community, where a group of experts will interact with a user community to create a thesaurus for a specific domain (e.g. the Art & Architecture Thesaurus AAT AAT) or an overarching classification scheme (e.g. the Dewey Decimal Classification). A similar type of activity is being undertaken more recently in a less centralised manner by web communities, producing for example the DMOZ web directory DMOZ, or the Topic Exchange for weblog topics Topic Exchange. The web, including the semantic web, provides a medium within which communities can interact and collaboratively build and use vocabularies of concepts. A simple language is required that allows these communities to express the structure and content of their vocabularies in a machine-understandable way, enabling exchange and reuse. The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is an ideal language for making statements about web resources and publishing metadata. However, RDF provides only the low level semantics required to form metadata statements. RDF vocabularies must be built on top of RDF to support the expression of more specific types of information within metadata. Ontology languages such as OWL OWL add a layer of expressive power to RDF, and provide powerful tools for defining complex conceptual structures, which can be used to generate rich metadata. However, the class-oriented, logically precise modelling required to construct useful web ontologies is demanding in terms of expertise, effort, and therefore cost. In many cases this type of modelling may be superfluous or unsuited to requirements. Therefore there is a need for a language for expressing vocabularies of concepts for use in semantically rich metadata, that is powerful enough to support semantically enhanced search, but simple enough to be undemanding in terms of the cost and expertise required to use it."
  5. Daconta, M.C.; Oberst, L.J.; Smith, K.T.: ¬The Semantic Web : A guide to the future of XML, Web services and knowledge management (2003) 0.01
    0.0070635104 = product of:
      0.014127021 = sum of:
        0.014127021 = product of:
          0.028254041 = sum of:
            0.028254041 = weight(_text_:22 in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028254041 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2007 10:37:38
  6. Subirats, I.; Prasad, A.R.D.; Keizer, J.; Bagdanov, A.: Implementation of rich metadata formats and demantic tools using DSpace (2008) 0.01
    0.0070635104 = product of:
      0.014127021 = sum of:
        0.014127021 = product of:
          0.028254041 = sum of:
            0.028254041 = weight(_text_:22 in 2656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028254041 = score(doc=2656,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2656, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2656)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  7. Shoffner, M.; Greenberg, J.; Kramer-Duffield, J.; Woodbury, D.: Web 2.0 semantic systems : collaborative learning in science (2008) 0.01
    0.0070635104 = product of:
      0.014127021 = sum of:
        0.014127021 = product of:
          0.028254041 = sum of:
            0.028254041 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028254041 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  8. Brunetti, J.M.; Roberto García, R.: User-centered design and evaluation of overview components for semantic data exploration (2014) 0.01
    0.0070635104 = product of:
      0.014127021 = sum of:
        0.014127021 = product of:
          0.028254041 = sum of:
            0.028254041 = weight(_text_:22 in 1626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028254041 = score(doc=1626,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1626, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1626)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  9. Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Bar-Ilan, J.: Towards maximal unification of semantically diverse ontologies for controversial domains (2014) 0.01
    0.0070635104 = product of:
      0.014127021 = sum of:
        0.014127021 = product of:
          0.028254041 = sum of:
            0.028254041 = weight(_text_:22 in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028254041 = score(doc=1634,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  10. Shaw, R.; Buckland, M.: Open identification and linking of the four Ws (2008) 0.01
    0.0061805714 = product of:
      0.012361143 = sum of:
        0.012361143 = product of:
          0.024722286 = sum of:
            0.024722286 = weight(_text_:22 in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024722286 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18256627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  11. Isaac, A.; Schlobach, S.; Matthezing, H.; Zinn, C.: Integrated access to cultural heritage resources through representation and alignment of controlled vocabularies (2008) 0.01
    0.0058421064 = product of:
      0.011684213 = sum of:
        0.011684213 = product of:
          0.023368426 = sum of:
            0.023368426 = weight(_text_:classification in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023368426 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    This paper is based on a talk given at "Information Access for the Global Community, An International Seminar on the Universal Decimal Classification" held on 4-5 June 2007 in The Hague, The Netherlands. An abstract of this talk will be published in Extensions and Corrections to the UDC, an annual publication of the UDC consortium. Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Digital libraries and the semantic web: context, applications and research".
  12. Veltman, K.H.: Towards a Semantic Web for culture 0.01
    0.0058421064 = product of:
      0.011684213 = sum of:
        0.011684213 = product of:
          0.023368426 = sum of:
            0.023368426 = weight(_text_:classification in 4040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023368426 = score(doc=4040,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4040, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4040)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Today's semantic web deals with meaning in a very restricted sense and offers static solutions. This is adequate for many scientific, technical purposes and for business transactions requiring machine-to-machine communication, but does not answer the needs of culture. Science, technology and business are concerned primarily with the latest findings, the state of the art, i.e. the paradigm or dominant world-view of the day. In this context, history is considered non-essential because it deals with things that are out of date. By contrast, culture faces a much larger challenge, namely, to re-present changes in ways of knowing; changing meanings in different places at a given time (synchronically) and over time (diachronically). Culture is about both objects and the commentaries on them; about a cumulative body of knowledge; about collective memory and heritage. Here, history plays a central role and older does not mean less important or less relevant. Hence, a Leonardo painting that is 400 years old, or a Greek statue that is 2500 years old, typically have richer commentaries and are often more valuable than their contemporary equivalents. In this context, the science of meaning (semantics) is necessarily much more complex than semantic primitives. A semantic web in the cultural domain must enable us to trace how meaning and knowledge organisation have evolved historically in different cultures. This paper examines five issues to address this challenge: 1) different world-views (i.e. a shift from substance to function and from ontology to multiple ontologies); 2) developments in definitions and meaning; 3) distinctions between words and concepts; 4) new classes of relations; and 5) dynamic models of knowledge organisation. These issues reveal that historical dimensions of cultural diversity in knowledge organisation are also central to classification of biological diversity. New ways are proposed of visualizing knowledge using a time/space horizon to distinguish between universals and particulars. It is suggested that new visualization methods make possible a history of questions as well as of answers, thus enabling dynamic access to cultural and historical dimensions of knowledge. Unlike earlier media, which were limited to recording factual dimensions of collective memory, digital media enable us to explore theories, ways of perceiving, ways of knowing; to enter into other mindsets and world-views and thus to attain novel insights and new levels of tolerance. Some practical consequences are outlined.
  13. Engels, R.H.P.; Lech, T.Ch.: Generating ontologies for the Semantic Web : OntoBuilder (2004) 0.01
    0.0058421064 = product of:
      0.011684213 = sum of:
        0.011684213 = product of:
          0.023368426 = sum of:
            0.023368426 = weight(_text_:classification in 4404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023368426 = score(doc=4404,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4404, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4404)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Thus, there is a clear need for the web to become more semantic. The aim of introducing semantics into the web is to enhance the precision of search, but also enable the use of logical reasoning on web contents in order to answer queries. The CORPORUM OntoBuilder toolset is developed specifically for this task. It consists of a set of applications that can fulfil a variety of tasks, either as stand-alone tools, or augmenting each other. Important tasks that are dealt with by CORPORUM are related to document and information retrieval (find relevant documents, or support the user finding them), as well as information extraction (building a knowledge base from web documents to answer queries), information dissemination (summarizing strategies and information visualization), and automated document classification strategies. First versions of the toolset are encouraging in that they show large potential as a supportive technology for building up the Semantic Web. In this chapter, methods for transforming the current web into a semantic web are discussed, as well as a technical solution that can perform this task: the CORPORUM tool set. First, the toolset is introduced; followed by some pragmatic issues relating to the approach; then there will be a short overview of the theory in relation to CognIT's vision; and finally, a discussion on some of the applications that arose from the project.
  14. Isaac, A.: Aligning thesauri for an integrated access to Cultural Heritage Resources (2007) 0.01
    0.005111843 = product of:
      0.010223686 = sum of:
        0.010223686 = product of:
          0.020447372 = sum of:
            0.020447372 = weight(_text_:classification in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020447372 = score(doc=553,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.12315229 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Currently, a number of efforts are being carried out to integrate collections from different institutions and containing heterogeneous material. Examples of such projects are The European Library [1] and the Memory of the Netherlands [2]. A crucial point for the success of these is the availability to provide a unified access on top of the different collections, e.g. using one single vocabulary for querying or browsing the objects they contain. This is made difficult by the fact that the objects from different collections are often described using different vocabularies - thesauri, classification schemes - and are therefore not interoperable at the semantic level. To solve this problem, one can turn to semantic links - mappings - between the elements of the different vocabularies. If one knows that a concept C from a vocabulary V is semantically equivalent to a concept to a concept D from vocabulary W, then an appropriate search engine can return all the objects that were indexed against D for a query for objects described using C. We thus have an access to other collections, using a single one vocabulary. This is however an ideal situation, and hard alignment work is required to reach it. Several projects in the past have tried to implement such a solution, like MACS [3] and Renardus [4]. They have demonstrated very interesting results, but also highlighted the difficulty of aligning manually all the different vocabularies involved in practical cases, which sometimes contain hundreds of thousands of concepts. To alleviate this problem, a number of tools have been proposed in order to provide with candidate mappings between two input vocabularies, making alignment a (semi-) automatic task. Recently, the Semantic Web community has produced a lot of these alignment tools'. Several techniques are found, depending on the material they exploit: labels of concepts, structure of vocabularies, collection objects and external knowledge sources. Throughout our presentation, we will present a concrete heterogeneity case where alignment techniques have been applied to build a (pilot) browser, developed in the context of the STITCH project [5]. This browser enables a unified access to two collections of illuminated manuscripts, using the description vocabulary used in the first collection, Mandragore [6], or the one used by the second, Iconclass [7]. In our talk, we will also make the point for using unified representations the vocabulary semantic and lexical information. Additionally to ease the use of the alignment tools that have these vocabularies as input, turning to a standard representation format helps designing applications that are more generic, like the browser we demonstrate. We give pointers to SKOS [8], an open and web-enabled format currently developed by the Semantic Web community.
  15. Knitting the semantic Web (2007) 0.01
    0.005111843 = product of:
      0.010223686 = sum of:
        0.010223686 = product of:
          0.020447372 = sum of:
            0.020447372 = weight(_text_:classification in 1397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020447372 = score(doc=1397,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.12315229 = fieldWeight in 1397, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1397)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.43, nos.3/4
  16. Jacobs, I.: From chaos, order: W3C standard helps organize knowledge : SKOS Connects Diverse Knowledge Organization Systems to Linked Data (2009) 0.01
    0.005111843 = product of:
      0.010223686 = sum of:
        0.010223686 = product of:
          0.020447372 = sum of:
            0.020447372 = weight(_text_:classification in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020447372 = score(doc=3062,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.12315229 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Content
    SKOS Adapts to the Diversity of Knowledge Organization Systems A useful starting point for understanding the role of SKOS is the set of subject headings published by the US Library of Congress (LOC) for categorizing books, videos, and other library resources. These headings can be used to broaden or narrow queries for discovering resources. For instance, one can narrow a query about books on "Chinese literature" to "Chinese drama," or further still to "Chinese children's plays." Library of Congress subject headings have evolved within a community of practice over a period of decades. By now publishing these subject headings in SKOS, the Library of Congress has made them available to the linked data community, which benefits from a time-tested set of concepts to re-use in their own data. This re-use adds value ("the network effect") to the collection. When people all over the Web re-use the same LOC concept for "Chinese drama," or a concept from some other vocabulary linked to it, this creates many new routes to the discovery of information, and increases the chances that relevant items will be found. As an example of mapping one vocabulary to another, a combined effort from the STITCH, TELplus and MACS Projects provides links between LOC concepts and RAMEAU, a collection of French subject headings used by the Bibliothèque Nationale de France and other institutions. SKOS can be used for subject headings but also many other approaches to organizing knowledge. Because different communities are comfortable with different organization schemes, SKOS is designed to port diverse knowledge organization systems to the Web. "Active participation from the library and information science community in the development of SKOS over the past seven years has been key to ensuring that SKOS meets a variety of needs," said Thomas Baker, co-chair of the Semantic Web Deployment Working Group, which published SKOS. "One goal in creating SKOS was to provide new uses for well-established knowledge organization systems by providing a bridge to the linked data cloud." SKOS is part of the Semantic Web technology stack. Like the Web Ontology Language (OWL), SKOS can be used to define vocabularies. But the two technologies were designed to meet different needs. SKOS is a simple language with just a few features, tuned for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems such as thesauri and classification schemes. OWL offers a general and powerful framework for knowledge representation, where additional "rigor" can afford additional benefits (for instance, business rule processing). To get started with SKOS, see the SKOS Primer.
  17. Weller, K.: Knowledge representation in the Social Semantic Web (2010) 0.01
    0.005111843 = product of:
      0.010223686 = sum of:
        0.010223686 = product of:
          0.020447372 = sum of:
            0.020447372 = weight(_text_:classification in 4515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020447372 = score(doc=4515,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16603322 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05213454 = queryNorm
                0.12315229 = fieldWeight in 4515, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4515)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The main purpose of this book is to sum up the vital and highly topical research issue of knowledge representation on the Web and to discuss novel solutions by combining benefits of folksonomies and Web 2.0 approaches with ontologies and semantic technologies. This book contains an overview of knowledge representation approaches in past, present and future, introduction to ontologies, Web indexing and in first case the novel approaches of developing ontologies. This title combines aspects of knowledge representation for both the Semantic Web (ontologies) and the Web 2.0 (folksonomies). Currently there is no monographic book which provides a combined overview over these topics. focus on the topic of using knowledge representation methods for document indexing purposes. For this purpose, considerations from classical librarian interests in knowledge representation (thesauri, classification schemes etc.) are included, which are not part of most other books which have a stronger background in computer science.

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 55
  • el 16
  • m 8
  • s 4
  • n 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…