Search (75 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Semantische Interoperabilität"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Haslhofer, B.: Uniform SPARQL access to interlinked (digital library) sources (2007) 0.00 
    0.0042646225 = product of:
  0.025587734 = sum of:
    0.008011244 = weight(_text_:in in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008011244 = score(doc=541,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 541, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=541)
    0.009661627 = weight(_text_:der in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009661627 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.19743896 = fieldWeight in 541, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=541)
    0.007914863 = product of:
      0.023744587 = sum of:
        0.023744587 = weight(_text_:22 in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023744587 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 541, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=541)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)
    Abstract
    In this presentation, we therefore focus on a solution for providing uniform access to Digital Libraries and other online services. In order to enable uniform query access to heterogeneous sources, we must provide metadata interoperability in a way that a query language - in this case SPARQL - can cope with the incompatibility of the metadata in various sources without changing their already existing information models.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:46
  2. Si, L.: Encoding formats and consideration of requirements for mapping (2007) 0.00 
    0.0030857208 = product of:
  0.018514324 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
    0.008453923 = weight(_text_:der in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008453923 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17275909 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
    0.0069255047 = product of:
      0.020776514 = sum of:
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(3/18)
    Abstract
    With the increasing requirement of establishing semantic mappings between different vocabularies, further development of these encoding formats is becoming more and more important. For this reason, four types of knowledge representation formats were assessed:MARC21 for Classification Data in XML, Zthes XML Schema, XTM(XML Topic Map), and SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organisation System). This paper explores the potential of adapting these representation formats to support different semantic mapping methods, and discusses the implication of extending them to represent more complex KOS.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:27
  3. Concepts in Context : Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization 0.00 
    0.0023267977 = product of:
  0.02094118 = sum of:
    0.005664805 = weight(_text_:in in 4038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005664805 = score(doc=4038,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.19010136 = fieldWeight in 4038, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4038)
    0.015276373 = weight(_text_:der in 4038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015276373 = score(doc=4038,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.3121784 = fieldWeight in 4038, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4038)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Am 19. und 20. Juli 2010 richten das Institut für Informationsmanagement (IIM) der Fachhochschule Köln und die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB) im Rahmen der Projekte CrissCross und RESEDA die Fachtagung Concepts in Context - Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization aus. Die Tagung findet in der Fachhochschule Köln statt und widmet sich Fragen der Interoperabilität und semantischer Informationen in der Wissensorganisation. Die Konferenz bietet Experten, Anwendern und Interessierten die Möglichkeit, verschiedene Modelle und Strategien der Wissensorganisation zu diskutieren und sich über neue Entwicklungen im Bereich der Standardisierung und Implementierung solcher Modelle zu informieren und auszutauschen. Der erste Tag ist als Abschlussworkshop für das DFG-Projekt CrissCross konzipiert und bietet neben einem umfassenden Überblick über das Projekt auch weitere praktische Anwendungsbeispiele für semantische Interoperabilität und mögliche Szenarien für ihre Anwendung in Online-Katalogen und im Rahmen des Semantic Web. Eine vertiefte Auseinandersetzung mit neueren Entwicklungen im Bereich der Interoperabilität unterschiedlicher Begriffssysteme sowie mit zukunftsträchtigen Modellen der semantischen Wissensorganisation findet am zweiten Tag statt. Aktuelle thematische Schwerpunkte werden hier die Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) und die Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) sein. Zur Konferenz werden Informationsspezialisten aus mehreren Ländern erwartet.
    Content
    Beiträge: Insights and Outlooks: A Retrospective View on the CrissCross Project - Jan-Helge Jacobs, Tina Mengel, Katrin Müller Translingual Retrieval: Moving between Vocabularies - MACS 2010 - Helga Karg und Yvonne Jahns Intersystem Relations: Characteristics and Functionalities - Jessica Hubrich Would an Explicit Versioning of the DDC Bring Advantages for Retrieval? - Claudia Effenberger und Julia Hauser A Semantic Web View on Concepts and their Alignments - From Specific Library Cases to a Wider Linked Data Perspective - Antoine Isaac Conceptual Foundations for Semantic Mapping and Semantic Search - Dagobert Soergel In Pursuit of Cross-Vocabulary Interoperability: Can We Standardize Mapping Types? - Stella Dextre Clarke Searching in a Multi-Thesauri-Scenario - Experiences with SKOS and Terminology Mappings - Philipp Mayr Interoperability and Semantics in RDF Representations of FRBR, FRAD and FRSAD - Gordon Dunsire FRSAD: Challenges of Modelling the Aboutness - Maja Zumer Integrating Interoperability into FRSAD - Felix Boteram
  4. Dini, L.: CACAO : multilingual access to bibliographic records (2007) 0.00 
    0.0019162666 = product of:
  0.0172464 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
    0.011872293 = product of:
      0.03561688 = sum of:
        0.03561688 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03561688 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  5. Mengel, T.; Svensson, L.: Dewey basics for mapping - Bringing Dewey mappings onto the Semantic Web (2015) 0.00 
    0.0018394949 = product of:
  0.016555455 = sum of:
    0.0044784215 = weight(_text_:in in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044784215 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 1721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1721)
    0.0120770335 = weight(_text_:der in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0120770335 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.2467987 = fieldWeight in 1721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1721)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    What it is about to map Dewey - Things to talk about (early!) in the mapping project - Things to consider when you want to share your mappings with someone else
    Content
    Präsentation anlässlich der EDUG 2015, Mapping Workshop, 15 Apr 2015.
  6. Landry, P.: MACS: multilingual access to subject and link management : Extending the Multilingual Capacity of TEL in the EDL Project (2007) 0.00 
    0.0018030024 = product of:
  0.016227022 = sum of:
    0.0063334443 = weight(_text_:in in 1287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063334443 = score(doc=1287,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 1287, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1287)
    0.0098935785 = product of:
      0.029680735 = sum of:
        0.029680735 = weight(_text_:22 in 1287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029680735 = score(doc=1287,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1287, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1287)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  7. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2012) 0.00 
    0.0017772348 = product of:
  0.015995113 = sum of:
    0.007600134 = weight(_text_:in in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007600134 = score(doc=1967,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.00839498 = product of:
      0.025184939 = sum of:
        0.025184939 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025184939 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
    Source
    Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn
  8. BARTOC : the BAsel Register of Thesauri, Ontologies & Classifications 0.00 
    0.0015426357 = product of:
  0.013883721 = sum of:
    0.005429798 = weight(_text_:in in 1734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005429798 = score(doc=1734,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 1734, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1734)
    0.008453923 = weight(_text_:der in 1734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008453923 = score(doc=1734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17275909 = fieldWeight in 1734, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1734)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    BARTOC, http://bartoc.org, is a bibliographic database that provides metadata of as many Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) as possible and offers a faceted, responsive web design search interface in 20 languages. With more than 1100 interdisciplinary items (Thesauri, Ontologies, Classifications, Glossaries, Controlled Vocabularies, Taxonomies) in 70 languages, BARTOC is the largest database of its kind, multilingual both by content and features, and will still be growing. Metadata are being enriched with DDC-numbers down to the third level, and subject headings from EuroVoc, the EU's multilingual thesaurus. BARTOC has been developed by the University Library of Basel, Switzerland, and continues in the tradition of library and information science to collect bibliographic records of controlled and structured vocabularies.
    Content
    Vgl. den Poster-Beitrag während der UDC_2015.
  9. Nicholson, D.: High-Level Thesaurus (HILT) project : interoperability and cross-searching distributed services (200?) 0.00 
    0.0014503849 = product of:
  0.013053464 = sum of:
    0.0050667557 = weight(_text_:in in 5966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050667557 = score(doc=5966,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 5966, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5966)
    0.007986708 = product of:
      0.023960123 = sum of:
        0.023960123 = weight(_text_:29 in 5966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023960123 = score(doc=5966,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 5966, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5966)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    My presentation is about the HILT, High Level Thesaurus Project, which is looking, very roughly speaking, at how we might deal with interoperability problems relating to cross-searching distributed services by subject. The aims of HILT are to study and report on the problem of cross-searching and browsing by subject across a range of communities, services, and service or resource types in the UK given the wide range of subject schemes and associated practices in place
    Date
    13. 4.2008 12:29:16
  10. Tonkin, E.; Baptista, A.A.; Hooland, S. van; Resmini, A.; Mendéz, E.; Neville, L.: Kinds of Tags : a collaborative research study on tag usage and structure (2007) 0.00 
    0.001431926 = product of:
  0.012887334 = sum of:
    0.004433411 = weight(_text_:in in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004433411 = score(doc=531,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
    0.008453923 = weight(_text_:der in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008453923 = score(doc=531,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17275909 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    KoT (Kinds of Tags) is an ongoing joint collaborative research effort with many participants worldwide, including the University of Minho, UKOLN, the University of Bologna, the Université Libre de Bruxelles and La Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. It is focused on the analysis of tags that are in common use in the practice of social tagging, with the aim of discovering how easily tags can be 'normalised' for interoperability with standard metadata environments such as the DC Metadata Terms.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  11. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Overview of ISO NP 25964 : structured vocabularies for information retrieval (2007) 0.00 
    0.0014022585 = product of:
  0.012620326 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=535,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
    0.00724622 = weight(_text_:der in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00724622 = score(doc=535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, the international standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri respectively dated 1986 and 1985, are very much in need of revision. A proposal to revise them was recently approved by the relevant subcommittee, ISO TC46/SC9. The work will be based on BS 8723, a five part standard of which Parts 1 and 2 were published in 2005, Parts 3 and 4 are scheduled for publication in 2007, and Part 5 is still in draft. This subsession will address aspects of the whole revision project. It is conceived as a panel session starting with a brief overview from the project leader. Then there are three presentations of 15 minutes, plus 5 minutes each for specific questions. At the end we have 20 minutes for questions to any or all of the panel, and discussion of issues from the workshop participants.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  12. Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schopman, B.; Schlobach, S.; Meij, L. van der: Matching multilingual subject vocabularies (2009) 0.00 
    0.0014022585 = product of:
  0.012620326 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=3035,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
    0.00724622 = weight(_text_:der in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00724622 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Most libraries and other cultural heritage institutions use controlled knowledge organisation systems, such as thesauri, to describe their collections. Unfortunately, as most of these institutions use different such systems, united access to heterogeneous collections is difficult. Things are even worse in an international context when concepts have labels in different languages. In order to overcome the multilingual interoperability problem between European Libraries, extensive work has been done to manually map concepts from different knowledge organisation systems, which is a tedious and expensive process. Within the TELplus project, we developed and evaluated methods to automatically discover these mappings, using different ontology matching techniques. In experiments on major French, English and German subject heading lists Rameau, LCSH and SWD, we show that we can automatically produce mappings of surprisingly good quality, even when using relatively naive translation and matching methods.
  13. Hollink, L.; Assem, M. van; Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schreiber, G.: Two variations on ontology alignment evaluation : methodological issues (2008) 0.00 
    0.0013331628 = product of:
  0.011998464 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=4645,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=4645,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Evaluation of ontology alignments is in practice done in two ways: (1) assessing individual correspondences and (2) comparing the alignment to a reference alignment. However, this type of evaluation does not guarantee that an application which uses the alignment will perform well. In this paper, we contribute to the current ontology alignment evaluation practices by proposing two alternative evaluation methods that take into account some characteristics of a usage scenario without doing a full-fledged end-to-end evaluation. We compare different evaluation approaches in three case studies, focussing on methodological issues. Each case study considers an alignment between a different pair of ontologies, ranging from rich and well-structured to small and poorly structured. This enables us to conclude on the use of different evaluation approaches in different settings.
    Date
    29. 7.2011 14:44:56
  14. Naudet, Y.; Latour, T.; Chen, D.: ¬A Systemic approach to Interoperability formalization (2009) 0.00 
    0.0013331628 = product of:
  0.011998464 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=2740,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2740,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    With a first version developed last year, the Ontology of Interoperability (OoI) aims at formally describing concepts relating to problems and solutions in the domain of interoperability. From the beginning, the OoI has its foundations in the systemic theory and addresses interoperability from the general point of view of a system, whether it is composed by other systems (systems-of-systems) or not. In this paper, we present the last OoI focusing on the systemic approach. We then integrate a classification of interoperability knowledge provided by the Framework for Enterprise Interoperability. This way, we contextualize the OoI with a specific vocabulary to the enterprise domain, where solutions to interoperability problems are characterized according to interoperability approaches defined in the ISO 14258 and both solutions and problems can be localized into enterprises levels and characterized by interoperability levels, as defined in the European Interoperability Framework.
    Date
    29. 1.2016 18:48:14
  15. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.00 
    0.0013271755 = product of:
  0.01194458 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=4820,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
    0.0059361467 = product of:
      0.01780844 = sum of:
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  16. Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schlobach, S.; Meij, L. van der; Schopman, B.: Instance-based semantic interoperability in the cultural heritage (2012) 0.00 
    0.0012803823 = product of:
  0.0115234405 = sum of:
    0.0054849237 = weight(_text_:in in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054849237 = score(doc=125,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    This paper gives a comprehensive overview over the problem of Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, with a particular focus on solutions centered around extensional, i.e., instance-based, ontology matching methods. It presents three typical scenarios requiring interoperability, one with homogenous collections, one with heterogeneous collections, and one with multi-lingual collection. It discusses two different ways to evaluate potential alignments, one based on the application of re-indexing, one using a reference alignment. To these scenarios we apply extensional matching with different similarity measures which gives interesting insights. Finally, we firmly position our work in the Cultural Heritage context through an extensive discussion of the relevance for, and issues related to this specific field. The findings are as unspectacular as expected but nevertheless important: the provided methods can really improve interoperability in a number of important cases, but they are not universal solutions to all related problems. This paper will provide a solid foundation for any future work on Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, in particular for anybody intending to apply extensional methods.
  17. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Cross-concordances : terminology mapping and its effectiveness for information retrieval (2008) 0.00 
    0.0011826826 = product of:
  0.010644143 = sum of:
    0.0046541123 = weight(_text_:in in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046541123 = score(doc=2323,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    The German Federal Ministry for Education and Research funded a major terminology mapping initiative, which found its conclusion in 2007. The task of this terminology mapping initiative was to organize, create and manage 'cross-concordances' between controlled vocabularies (thesauri, classification systems, subject heading lists) centred around the social sciences but quickly extending to other subject areas. 64 crosswalks with more than 500,000 relations were established. In the final phase of the project, a major evaluation effort to test and measure the effectiveness of the vocabulary mappings in an information system environment was conducted. The paper reports on the cross-concordance work and evaluation results.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:33:29
  18. Heckner, M.; Mühlbacher, S.; Wolff, C.: Tagging tagging : a classification model for user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems (2007) 0.00 
    0.0011661798 = product of:
  0.010495618 = sum of:
    0.005664805 = weight(_text_:in in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005664805 = score(doc=533,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.19010136 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
    0.0048308135 = weight(_text_:der in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048308135 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.
    Therefore our main research questions are as follows: - Is it possible to discover regular patterns in tag usage and to establish a stable category model? - Does a specific tagging language comparable to internet slang or chatspeak evolve? - How do social tags differ from traditional (author / expert) keywords? - To what degree are social tags taken from or findable in the full text of the tagged resource? - Do tags in a research literature context go beyond simple content description (e.g. tags indicating time or task-related information, cf. Kipp et al. 2006)?
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  19. Dunsire, G.; Willer, M.: Initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web (2010) 0.00 
    0.001157171 = product of:
  0.010414539 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=3965,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
    0.006831802 = weight(_text_:der in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006831802 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.13961042 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    This paper describes recent initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web, including IFLA standards such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), and International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) along with the infrastructure that supports them. The FRBR Review Group is currently developing representations of FRAD and the entityrelationship model of FRBR in resource description framework (RDF) applications, using a combination of RDF, RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), cross-relating both models where appropriate. The ISBD/XML Task Group is investigating the representation of ISBD in RDF. The IFLA Namespaces project is developing an administrative and technical infrastructure to support such initiatives and encourage uptake of standards by other agencies. The paper describes similar initiatives with related external standards such as RDA - resource description and access, REICAT (the new Italian cataloguing rules) and CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM). The DCMI RDA Task Group is working with the Joint Steering Committee for RDA to develop Semantic Web representations of RDA structural elements, which are aligned with FRBR and FRAD, and controlled metadata content vocabularies. REICAT is also based on FRBR, and an object-oriented version of FRBR has been integrated with CRM, which itself has an RDF representation. CRM was initially based on the metadata needs of the museum community, and is now seeking extension to the archives community with the eventual aim of developing a model common to the main cultural information domains of archives, libraries and museums. The Vocabulary Mapping Framework (VMF) project has developed a Semantic Web tool to automatically generate mappings between metadata models from the information communities, including publishers. The tool is based on several standards, including CRM, FRAD, FRBR, MARC21 and RDA.
    The paper discusses the importance of these initiatives in releasing as linked data the very large quantities of rich, professionally-generated metadata stored in formats based on these standards, such as UNIMARC and MARC21, addressing such issues as critical mass for semantic and statistical inferencing, integration with user- and machine-generated metadata, and authenticity, veracity and trust. The paper also discusses related initiatives to release controlled vocabularies, including the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), ISBD, Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Rameau (French subject headings), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) as linked data. Finally, the paper discusses the potential collective impact of these initiatives on metadata workflows and management systems.
    Content
    Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management
  20. Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000) 0.00 
    0.0011178222 = product of:
  0.0100604 = sum of:
    0.0031348949 = weight(_text_:in in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031348949 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
    0.0069255047 = product of:
      0.020776514 = sum of:
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.
    Date
    11. 5.2013 19:22:18

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 25
  • r 2
  • n 1
  • p 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes