-
Resource Description Framework (RDF) (2004)
0.06
0.055449694 = product of:
0.16634908 = sum of:
0.09491582 = weight(_text_:applications in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09491582 = score(doc=3063,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.5503137 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016935252 = score(doc=3063,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
0.054498006 = weight(_text_:software in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054498006 = score(doc=3063,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- The Resource Description Framework (RDF) integrates a variety of applications from library catalogs and world-wide directories to syndication and aggregation of news, software, and content to personal collections of music, photos, and events using XML as an interchange syntax. The RDF specifications provide a lightweight ontology system to support the exchange of knowledge on the Web. The W3C Semantic Web Activity Statement explains W3C's plans for RDF, including the RDF Core WG, Web Ontology and the RDF Interest Group.
- Content
- Specifications - Bookmarks (Intro * Articles) - Projects and Applications - Developer tools - Schemas - Related Technologies - Timeline
-
SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference : W3C Recommendation 18 August 2009 (2009)
0.05
0.047989633 = product of:
0.1439689 = sum of:
0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07118686 = score(doc=4688,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012701439 = score(doc=4688,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.06008059 = weight(_text_:systems in 4688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06008059 = score(doc=4688,freq=12.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.4990213 = fieldWeight in 4688, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4688)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- This document defines the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), a common data model for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems via the Web. Many knowledge organization systems, such as thesauri, taxonomies, classification schemes and subject heading systems, share a similar structure, and are used in similar applications. SKOS captures much of this similarity and makes it explicit, to enable data and technology sharing across diverse applications. The SKOS data model provides a standard, low-cost migration path for porting existing knowledge organization systems to the Semantic Web. SKOS also provides a lightweight, intuitive language for developing and sharing new knowledge organization systems. It may be used on its own, or in combination with formal knowledge representation languages such as the Web Ontology language (OWL). This document is the normative specification of the Simple Knowledge Organization System. It is intended for readers who are involved in the design and implementation of information systems, and who already have a good understanding of Semantic Web technology, especially RDF and OWL. For an informative guide to using SKOS, see the [SKOS-PRIMER].
-
Miles, A.: SKOS: requirements for standardization (2006)
0.04
0.0425388 = product of:
0.12761639 = sum of:
0.07118686 = weight(_text_:applications in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07118686 = score(doc=5703,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.41273528 = fieldWeight in 5703, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5703)
0.015556021 = weight(_text_:of in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015556021 = score(doc=5703,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 5703, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5703)
0.040873505 = weight(_text_:software in 5703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040873505 = score(doc=5703,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2629875 = fieldWeight in 5703, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5703)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- This paper poses three questions regarding the planned development of the Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) towards W3C Recommendation status. Firstly, what is the fundamental purpose and therefore scope of SKOS? Secondly, which key software components depend on SKOS, and how do they interact? Thirdly, what is the wider technological and social context in which SKOS is likely to be applied and how might this influence design goals? Some tentative conclusions are drawn and in particular it is suggested that the scope of SKOS be restricted to the formal representation of controlled structured vocabularies intended for use within retrieval applications. However, the main purpose of this paper is to articulate the assumptions that have motivated the design of SKOS, so that these may be reviewed prior to a rigorous standardization initiative.
- Footnote
- Presented at the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications in October 2006
-
Heery, R.; Wagner, H.: ¬A metadata registry for the Semantic Web (2002)
0.03
0.028086103 = product of:
0.08425831 = sum of:
0.041525673 = weight(_text_:applications in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041525673 = score(doc=1210,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.24076225 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
0.018889757 = weight(_text_:of in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018889757 = score(doc=1210,freq=52.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30833945 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
7.2111025 = tf(freq=52.0), with freq of:
52.0 = termFreq=52.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
0.023842877 = weight(_text_:software in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023842877 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.15340936 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- The Semantic Web activity is a W3C project whose goal is to enable a 'cooperative' Web where machines and humans can exchange electronic content that has clear-cut, unambiguous meaning. This vision is based on the automated sharing of metadata terms across Web applications. The declaration of schemas in metadata registries advance this vision by providing a common approach for the discovery, understanding, and exchange of semantics. However, many of the issues regarding registries are not clear, and ideas vary regarding their scope and purpose. Additionally, registry issues are often difficult to describe and comprehend without a working example. This article will explore the role of metadata registries and will describe three prototypes, written by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. The article will outline how the prototypes are being used to demonstrate and evaluate application scope, functional requirements, and technology solutions for metadata registries. Metadata schema registries are, in effect, databases of schemas that can trace an historical line back to shared data dictionaries and the registration process encouraged by the ISO/IEC 11179 community. New impetus for the development of registries has come with the development activities surrounding creation of the Semantic Web. The motivation for establishing registries arises from domain and standardization communities, and from the knowledge management community. Examples of current registry activity include:
* Agencies maintaining directories of data elements in a domain area in accordance with ISO/IEC 11179 (This standard specifies good practice for data element definition as well as the registration process. Example implementations are the National Health Information Knowledgebase hosted by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Environmental Data Registry hosted by the US Environmental Protection Agency.); * The xml.org directory of the Extended Markup Language (XML) document specifications facilitating re-use of Document Type Definition (DTD), hosted by the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS); * The MetaForm database of Dublin Core usage and mappings maintained at the State and University Library in Goettingen; * The Semantic Web Agreement Group Dictionary, a database of terms for the Semantic Web that can be referred to by humans and software agents; * LEXML, a multi-lingual and multi-jurisdictional RDF Dictionary for the legal world; * The SCHEMAS registry maintained by the European Commission funded SCHEMAS project, which indexes several metadata element sets as well as a large number of activity reports describing metadata related activities and initiatives. Metadata registries essentially provide an index of terms. Given the distributed nature of the Web, there are a number of ways this can be accomplished. For example, the registry could link to terms and definitions in schemas published by implementers and stored locally by the schema maintainer. Alternatively, the registry might harvest various metadata schemas from their maintainers. Registries provide 'added value' to users by indexing schemas relevant to a particular 'domain' or 'community of use' and by simplifying the navigation of terms by enabling multiple schemas to be accessed from one view. An important benefit of this approach is an increase in the reuse of existing terms, rather than users having to reinvent them. Merging schemas to one view leads to harmonization between applications and helps avoid duplication of effort. Additionally, the establishment of registries to index terms actively being used in local implementations facilitates the metadata standards activity by providing implementation experience transferable to the standards-making process.
-
Jacobs, I.: From chaos, order: W3C standard helps organize knowledge : SKOS Connects Diverse Knowledge Organization Systems to Linked Data (2009)
0.03
0.026992504 = product of:
0.08097751 = sum of:
0.029363085 = weight(_text_:applications in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029363085 = score(doc=3062,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.17024462 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016567415 = score(doc=3062,freq=40.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.03504701 = weight(_text_:systems in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03504701 = score(doc=3062,freq=12.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.29109573 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- 18 August 2009 -- Today W3C announces a new standard that builds a bridge between the world of knowledge organization systems - including thesauri, classifications, subject headings, taxonomies, and folksonomies - and the linked data community, bringing benefits to both. Libraries, museums, newspapers, government portals, enterprises, social networking applications, and other communities that manage large collections of books, historical artifacts, news reports, business glossaries, blog entries, and other items can now use Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to leverage the power of linked data. As different communities with expertise and established vocabularies use SKOS to integrate them into the Semantic Web, they increase the value of the information for everyone.
- 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.
-
RDF Primer : W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004 (2004)
0.02
0.018173773 = product of:
0.081781976 = sum of:
0.06711562 = weight(_text_:applications in 3064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06711562 = score(doc=3064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.38913056 = fieldWeight in 3064, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3064)
0.014666359 = weight(_text_:of in 3064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014666359 = score(doc=3064,freq=6.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 3064, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3064)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a language for representing information about resources in the World Wide Web. This Primer is designed to provide the reader with the basic knowledge required to effectively use RDF. It introduces the basic concepts of RDF and describes its XML syntax. It describes how to define RDF vocabularies using the RDF Vocabulary Description Language, and gives an overview of some deployed RDF applications. It also describes the content and purpose of other RDF specification documents.
-
OWL Web Ontology Language Overview (2004)
0.02
0.015866594 = product of:
0.071399674 = sum of:
0.050336715 = weight(_text_:applications in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050336715 = score(doc=4682,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2918479 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
0.021062955 = weight(_text_:of in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021062955 = score(doc=4682,freq=22.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL facilitates greater machine interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full. This document is written for readers who want a first impression of the capabilities of OWL. It provides an introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of each of the sublanguages of OWL. Some knowledge of RDF Schema is useful for understanding this document, but not essential. After this document, interested readers may turn to the OWL Guide for more detailed descriptions and extensive examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax.
-
Auer, S.; Bizer, C.; Kobilarov, G.; Lehmann, J.; Cyganiak, R.; Ives, Z.: DBpedia: a nucleus for a Web of open data (2007)
0.01
0.014008479 = product of:
0.063038155 = sum of:
0.050336715 = weight(_text_:applications in 4260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050336715 = score(doc=4260,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2918479 = fieldWeight in 4260, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4260)
0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 4260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012701439 = score(doc=4260,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4260, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4260)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- DBpedia is a community effort to extract structured information from Wikipedia and to make this information available on the Web. DBpedia allows you to ask sophisticated queries against datasets derived from Wikipedia and to link other datasets on the Web to Wikipedia data. We describe the extraction of the DBpedia datasets, and how the resulting information is published on the Web for human- and machineconsumption. We describe some emerging applications from the DBpedia community and show how website authors can facilitate DBpedia content within their sites. Finally, we present the current status of interlinking DBpedia with other open datasets on the Web and outline how DBpedia could serve as a nucleus for an emerging Web of open data.
-
OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements (2004)
0.01
0.013992363 = product of:
0.06296563 = sum of:
0.008467626 = weight(_text_:of in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008467626 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
0.054498006 = weight(_text_:software in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054498006 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This document specifies usage scenarios, goals and requirements for a web ontology language. An ontology formally defines a common set of terms that are used to describe and represent a domain. Ontologies can be used by automated tools to power advanced services such as more accurate web search, intelligent software agents and knowledge management.
-
OWL Web Ontology Language Guide (2004)
0.01
0.01304064 = product of:
0.05868288 = sum of:
0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041947264 = score(doc=4687,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 4687, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4687)
0.016735615 = weight(_text_:of in 4687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016735615 = score(doc=4687,freq=20.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 4687, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4687)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The World Wide Web as it is currently constituted resembles a poorly mapped geography. Our insight into the documents and capabilities available are based on keyword searches, abetted by clever use of document connectivity and usage patterns. The sheer mass of this data is unmanageable without powerful tool support. In order to map this terrain more precisely, computational agents require machine-readable descriptions of the content and capabilities of Web accessible resources. These descriptions must be in addition to the human-readable versions of that information. The OWL Web Ontology Language is intended to provide a language that can be used to describe the classes and relations between them that are inherent in Web documents and applications. This document demonstrates the use of the OWL language to - formalize a domain by defining classes and properties of those classes, - define individuals and assert properties about them, and - reason about these classes and individuals to the degree permitted by the formal semantics of the OWL language. The sections are organized to present an incremental definition of a set of classes, properties and individuals, beginning with the fundamentals and proceeding to more complex language components.
-
RDF Semantics (2004)
0.01
0.012410768 = product of:
0.055848457 = sum of:
0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 3065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014968789 = score(doc=3065,freq=4.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 3065, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3065)
0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 3065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040879667 = score(doc=3065,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3065, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3065)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This is a specification of a precise semantics, and corresponding complete systems of inference rules, for the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and RDF Schema (RDFS).
-
Tudhope, D.: Knowledge Organization System Services : brief review of NKOS activities and possibility of KOS registries (2007)
0.01
0.011068881 = product of:
0.049809963 = sum of:
0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017962547 = score(doc=100,freq=4.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 100, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=100)
0.031847417 = product of:
0.063694835 = sum of:
0.063694835 = weight(_text_:22 in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063694835 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 100, 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=100)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:41:14
-
Isaac, A.: Aligning thesauri for an integrated access to Cultural Heritage Resources (2007)
0.01
0.009919441 = product of:
0.044637486 = sum of:
0.029363085 = weight(_text_:applications in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029363085 = score(doc=553,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.17024462 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
0.015274401 = weight(_text_:of in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015274401 = score(doc=553,freq=34.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2493256 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- 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.
References [1] http:// www.theeuropeanlibrary.org [2] http://www.geheugenvannederland.nl [3] http://macs.cenl.org [4] Day, M., Koch, T., Neuroth, H.: Searching and browsing multiple subject gateways in the Renardus service. In Proceedings of the RC33 Sixth International Conference on Social Science Methodology, Amsterdam , 2005. [5] http://stitch.cs.vu.nl [6] http://mandragore.bnf.fr [7] http://www.iconclass.nl [8] www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/ 1 The Semantic Web vision supposes sharing data using different conceptualizations (ontologies), and therefore implies to tackle the semantic interoperability problem
-
Scheir, P.; Pammer, V.; Lindstaedt, S.N.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : does it exist? (2007)
0.01
0.009652025 = product of:
0.043434113 = sum of:
0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014818345 = score(doc=4329,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028615767 = score(doc=4329,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Plenty of contemporary attempts to search exist that are associated with the area of Semantic Web. But which of them qualify as information retrieval for the Semantic Web? Do such approaches exist? To answer these questions we take a look at the nature of the Semantic Web and Semantic Desktop and at definitions for information and data retrieval. We survey current approaches referred to by their authors as information retrieval for the Semantic Web or that use Semantic Web technology for search.
- Source
- Lernen - Wissen - Adaption : workshop proceedings / LWA 2007, Halle, September 2007. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute for Informatics, Databases and Information Systems. Hrsg.: Alexander Hinneburg
-
Panzer, M.: Relationships, spaces, and the two faces of Dewey (2008)
0.01
0.008977077 = product of:
0.040396847 = sum of:
0.025168357 = weight(_text_:applications in 2127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025168357 = score(doc=2127,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.14592396 = fieldWeight in 2127, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2127)
0.015228489 = weight(_text_:of in 2127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015228489 = score(doc=2127,freq=46.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2485762 = fieldWeight in 2127, product of:
6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
46.0 = termFreq=46.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2127)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Content
- "When dealing with a large-scale and widely-used knowledge organization system like the Dewey Decimal Classification, we often tend to focus solely on the organization aspect, which is closely intertwined with editorial work. This is perfectly understandable, since developing and updating the DDC, keeping up with current scientific developments, spotting new trends in both scholarly communication and popular publishing, and figuring out how to fit those patterns into the structure of the scheme are as intriguing as they are challenging. From the organization perspective, the intended user of the scheme is mainly the classifier. Dewey acts very much as a number-building engine, providing richly documented concepts to help with classification decisions. Since the Middle Ages, quasi-religious battles have been fought over the "valid" arrangement of places according to specific views of the world, as parodied by Jorge Luis Borges and others. Organizing knowledge has always been primarily an ontological activity; it is about putting the world into the classification. However, there is another side to this coin--the discovery side. While the hierarchical organization of the DDC establishes a default set of places and neighborhoods that is also visible in the physical manifestation of library shelves, this is just one set of relationships in the DDC. A KOS (Knowledge Organization System) becomes powerful by expressing those other relationships in a manner that not only collocates items in a physical place but in a knowledge space, and exposes those other relationships in ways beneficial and congenial to the unique perspective of an information seeker.
What are those "other" relationships that Dewey possesses and that seem so important to surface? Firstly, there is the relationship of concepts to resources. Dewey has been used for a long time, and over 200,000 numbers are assigned to information resources each year and added to WorldCat by the Library of Congress and the German National Library alone. Secondly, we have relationships between concepts in the scheme itself. Dewey provides a rich set of non-hierarchical relations, indicating other relevant and related subjects across disciplinary boundaries. Thirdly, perhaps most importantly, there is the relationship between the same concepts across different languages. Dewey has been translated extensively, and current versions are available in French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Spanish, and Vietnamese. Briefer representations of the top-three levels (the DDC Summaries) are available in several languages in the DeweyBrowser. This multilingual nature of the scheme allows searchers to access a broader range of resources or to switch the language of--and thus localize--subject metadata seamlessly. MelvilClass, a Dewey front-end developed by the German National Library for the German translation, could be used as a common interface to the DDC in any language, as it is built upon the standard DDC data format. It is not hard to give an example of the basic terminology of a class pulled together in a multilingual way: <class/794.8> a skos:Concept ; skos:notation "794.8"^^ddc:notation ; skos:prefLabel "Computer games"@en ; skos:prefLabel "Computerspiele"@de ; skos:prefLabel "Jeux sur ordinateur"@fr ; skos:prefLabel "Juegos por computador"@es .
Expressed in such manner, the Dewey number provides a language-independent representation of a Dewey concept, accompanied by language-dependent assertions about the concept. This information, identified by a URI, can be easily consumed by semantic web agents and used in various metadata scenarios. Fourthly, as we have seen, it is important to play well with others, i.e., establishing and maintaining relationships to other KOS and making the scheme available in different formats. As noted in the Dewey blog post "Tags and Dewey," since no single scheme is ever going to be the be-all, end-all solution for knowledge discovery, DDC concepts have been extensively mapped to other vocabularies and taxonomies, sometimes bridging them and acting as a backbone, sometimes using them as additional access vocabulary to be able to do more work "behind the scenes." To enable other applications and schemes to make use of those relationships, the full Dewey database is available in XML format; RDF-based formats and a web service are forthcoming. Pulling those relationships together under a common surface will be the next challenge going forward. In the semantic web community the concept of Linked Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_Data) currently receives some attention, with its emphasis on exposing and connecting data using technologies like URIs, HTTP and RDF to improve information discovery on the web. With its focus on relationships and discovery, it seems that Dewey will be well prepared to become part of this big linked data set. Now it is about putting the classification back into the world!"
-
Auer, S.; Lehmann, J.: What have Innsbruck and Leipzig in common? : extracting semantics from Wiki content (2007)
0.01
0.008907516 = product of:
0.04008382 = sum of:
0.015556021 = weight(_text_:of in 2481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015556021 = score(doc=2481,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 2481, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2481)
0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 2481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0245278 = score(doc=2481,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 2481, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2481)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Wikis are established means for the collaborative authoring, versioning and publishing of textual articles. The Wikipedia project, for example, succeeded in creating the by far largest encyclopedia just on the basis of a wiki. Recently, several approaches have been proposed on how to extend wikis to allow the creation of structured and semantically enriched content. However, the means for creating semantically enriched structured content are already available and are, although unconsciously, even used by Wikipedia authors. In this article, we present a method for revealing this structured content by extracting information from template instances. We suggest ways to efficiently query the vast amount of extracted information (e.g. more than 8 million RDF statements for the English Wikipedia version alone), leading to astonishing query answering possibilities (such as for the title question). We analyze the quality of the extracted content, and propose strategies for quality improvements with just minor modifications of the wiki systems being currently used.
-
OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004)
0.01
0.008481526 = product of:
0.038166866 = sum of:
0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016935252 = score(doc=4685,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
0.021231614 = product of:
0.042463228 = sum of:
0.042463228 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042463228 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, 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=4685)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This document contains and presents test cases for the Web Ontology Language (OWL) approved by the Web Ontology Working Group. Many of the test cases illustrate the correct usage of the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and the formal meaning of its constructs. Other test cases illustrate the resolution of issues considered by the Working Group. Conformance for OWL documents and OWL document checkers is specified.
- Date
- 14. 8.2011 13:33:22
-
Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000)
0.01
0.008161413 = product of:
0.036726356 = sum of:
0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018148692 = score(doc=759,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
0.018577661 = product of:
0.037155323 = sum of:
0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037155323 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- 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
-
Schmitz-Esser, W.; Sigel, A.: Introducing terminology-based ontologies : Papers and Materials presented by the authors at the workshop "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" (Poli/Schmitz-Esser/Sigel) at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006 (2006)
0.01
0.0074464604 = product of:
0.033509072 = sum of:
0.0089812735 = weight(_text_:of in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0089812735 = score(doc=1285,freq=4.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0245278 = score(doc=1285,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This work-in-progress communication contains the papers and materials presented by Winfried Schmitz-Esser and Alexander Sigel in the joint workshop (with Roberto Poli) "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006.
- Content
- Inhalt: 1. From traditional Knowledge Organization Systems (authority files, classifications, thesauri) towards ontologies on the web (Alexander Sigel) (Tutorial. Paper with Slides interspersed) pp. 3-53 2. Introduction to Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO): Formalizing and interrelating textual knowledge to enable intelligent action and knowledge sharing (Winfried Schmitz-Esser) pp. 54-113 3. First Idea Sketch on Modelling ICLO with Topic Maps (Alexander Sigel) (Work in progress paper. Topic maps available from the author) pp. 114-130
-
Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Challenges and opportunities for KOS standards (2007)
0.00
0.004128369 = product of:
0.037155323 = sum of:
0.037155323 = product of:
0.074310645 = sum of:
0.074310645 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.074310645 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4643, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4643)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
- Date
- 22. 9.2007 15:41:14
