Search (53 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Semantic Web"
  1. Urro, R.; Winiwarter, W.: Specifying ontologies : Linguistic aspects in problem-driven knowledge engineering (2001) 0.07
    0.07032649 = product of:
      0.21097946 = sum of:
        0.21097946 = weight(_text_:analogies in 3263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21097946 = score(doc=3263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38810563 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.200379 = idf(docFreq=32, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.5436135 = fieldWeight in 3263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.200379 = idf(docFreq=32, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3263)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The WWW includes on various levels systems of signs, not all of which are standardized as necessary for a real Semantic Web and not all of which can be standardized. Linguistic theories can contribute not only to the thus needed translation between sign systems, be they natural language systems or otherwise structured systems of knowledge representation, but also, of course, to standardization efforts. Within the current EC3 research framework for x-commerce, linguistic theories will play their part as they provide modeling analogies and patterns for the construction of a central knowledge base.
  2. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.06
    0.059349254 = product of:
      0.17804776 = sum of:
        0.17804776 = sum of:
          0.1267497 = weight(_text_:group in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.1267497 = score(doc=4685,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.5785894 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
          0.05129807 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.05129807 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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
  3. Prud'hommeaux, E.; Gayo, E.: RDF ventures to boldly meet your most pedestrian needs (2015) 0.04
    0.035230905 = product of:
      0.105692714 = sum of:
        0.105692714 = sum of:
          0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06721917 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 2024, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2024)
          0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03847355 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Defined in 1999 and paired with XML, the Resource Description Framework (RDF) has been cast as an RDF Schema, producing data that is well-structured but not validated, permitting certain illogical relationships. When stakeholders convened in 2014 to consider solutions to the data validation challenge, a W3C working group proposed Resource Shapes and Shape Expressions to describe the properties expected for an RDF node. Resistance rose from concerns about data and schema reuse, key principles in RDF. Ideally data types and properties are designed for broad use, but they are increasingly adopted with local restrictions for specific purposes. Resource Shapes are commonly treated as record classes, standing in for data structures but losing flexibility for later reuse. Of various solutions to the resulting tensions, the concept of record classes may be the most reasonable basis for agreement, satisfying stakeholders' objectives while allowing for variations with constraints.
    Source
    Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.18-22
  4. Shoffner, M.; Greenberg, J.; Kramer-Duffield, J.; Woodbury, D.: Web 2.0 semantic systems : collaborative learning in science (2008) 0.03
    0.029674627 = product of:
      0.08902388 = sum of:
        0.08902388 = sum of:
          0.06337485 = weight(_text_:group in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06337485 = score(doc=2661,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.2892947 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
          0.025649035 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025649035 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  5. Baker, T.; Bermès, E.; Coyle, K.; Dunsire, G.; Isaac, A.; Murray, P.; Panzer, M.; Schneider, J.; Singer, R.; Summers, E.; Waites, W.; Young, J.; Zeng, M.: Library Linked Data Incubator Group Final Report (2011) 0.02
    0.019760583 = product of:
      0.059281744 = sum of:
        0.059281744 = product of:
          0.11856349 = sum of:
            0.11856349 = weight(_text_:group in 4796) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11856349 = score(doc=4796,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.54122084 = fieldWeight in 4796, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4796)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The mission of the W3C Library Linked Data Incubator Group, chartered from May 2010 through August 2011, has been "to help increase global interoperability of library data on the Web, by bringing together people involved in Semantic Web activities - focusing on Linked Data - in the library community and beyond, building on existing initiatives, and identifying collaboration tracks for the future." In Linked Data [LINKEDDATA], data is expressed using standards such as Resource Description Framework (RDF) [RDF], which specifies relationships between things, and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs, or "Web addresses") [URI]. This final report of the Incubator Group examines how Semantic Web standards and Linked Data principles can be used to make the valuable information assets that library create and curate - resources such as bibliographic data, authorities, and concept schemes - more visible and re-usable outside of their original library context on the wider Web. The Incubator Group began by eliciting reports on relevant activities from parties ranging from small, independent projects to national library initiatives (see the separate report, Library Linked Data Incubator Group: Use Cases) [USECASE]. These use cases provided the starting point for the work summarized in the report: an analysis of the benefits of library Linked Data, a discussion of current issues with regard to traditional library data, existing library Linked Data initiatives, and legal rights over library data; and recommendations for next steps. The report also summarizes the results of a survey of current Linked Data technologies and an inventory of library Linked Data resources available today (see also the more detailed report, Library Linked Data Incubator Group: Datasets, Value Vocabularies, and Metadata Element Sets) [VOCABDATASET].
    Issue
    W3C Incubator Group Report 25 October 2011.
  6. Multimedia content and the Semantic Web : methods, standards, and tools (2005) 0.02
    0.018591296 = product of:
      0.055773884 = sum of:
        0.055773884 = sum of:
          0.028007988 = weight(_text_:group in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028007988 = score(doc=150,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.1278514 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
          0.027765896 = weight(_text_:22 in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.027765896 = score(doc=150,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047327764 = queryNorm
              0.16753313 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Classification
    006.7 22
    Date
    7. 3.2007 19:30:22
    DDC
    006.7 22
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.3, S.457-458 (A.M.A. Ahmad): "The concept of the semantic web has emerged because search engines and text-based searching are no longer adequate, as these approaches involve an extensive information retrieval process. The deployed searching and retrieving descriptors arc naturally subjective and their deployment is often restricted to the specific application domain for which the descriptors were configured. The new era of information technology imposes different kinds of requirements and challenges. Automatic extracted audiovisual features are required, as these features are more objective, domain-independent, and more native to audiovisual content. This book is a useful guide for researchers, experts, students, and practitioners; it is a very valuable reference and can lead them through their exploration and research in multimedia content and the semantic web. The book is well organized, and introduces the concept of the semantic web and multimedia content analysis to the reader through a logical sequence from standards and hypotheses through system examples, presenting relevant tools and methods. But in some chapters readers will need a good technical background to understand some of the details. Readers may attain sufficient knowledge here to start projects or research related to the book's theme; recent results and articles related to the active research area of integrating multimedia with semantic web technologies are included. This book includes full descriptions of approaches to specific problem domains such as content search, indexing, and retrieval. This book will be very useful to researchers in the multimedia content analysis field who wish to explore the benefits of emerging semantic web technologies in applying multimedia content approaches. The first part of the book covers the definition of the two basic terms multimedia content and semantic web. The Moving Picture Experts Group standards MPEG7 and MPEG21 are quoted extensively. In addition, the means of multimedia content description are elaborated upon and schematically drawn. This extensive description is introduced by authors who are actively involved in those standards and have been participating in the work of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/MPEG for many years. On the other hand, this results in bias against the ad hoc or nonstandard tools for multimedia description in favor of the standard approaches. This is a general book for multimedia content; more emphasis on the general multimedia description and extraction could be provided.
  7. Stojanovic, N.: Ontology-based Information Retrieval : methods and tools for cooperative query answering (2005) 0.02
    0.016704232 = product of:
      0.050112695 = sum of:
        0.050112695 = product of:
          0.15033808 = sum of:
            0.15033808 = weight(_text_:3a in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.15033808 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.40124533 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F1627&ei=tAtYUYrBNoHKtQb3l4GYBw&usg=AFQjCNHeaxKkKU3-u54LWxMNYGXaaDLCGw&sig2=8WykXWQoDKjDSdGtAakH2Q&bvm=bv.44442042,d.Yms.
  8. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Challenges and opportunities for KOS standards (2007) 0.01
    0.014961937 = product of:
      0.04488581 = sum of:
        0.04488581 = product of:
          0.08977162 = sum of:
            0.08977162 = weight(_text_:22 in 4643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08977162 = score(doc=4643,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  9. Resource Description Framework (RDF) (2004) 0.01
    0.014937594 = product of:
      0.04481278 = sum of:
        0.04481278 = product of:
          0.08962556 = sum of:
            0.08962556 = weight(_text_:group in 3063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08962556 = score(doc=3063,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.40912446 = fieldWeight in 3063, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3063)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    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.
  10. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview (2009) 0.01
    0.013070395 = product of:
      0.039211184 = sum of:
        0.039211184 = product of:
          0.07842237 = sum of:
            0.07842237 = weight(_text_:group in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07842237 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.35798392 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Editor
    W3C OWL Working Group
  11. Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies (2008) 0.01
    0.013070395 = product of:
      0.039211184 = sum of:
        0.039211184 = product of:
          0.07842237 = sum of:
            0.07842237 = weight(_text_:group in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07842237 = score(doc=4471,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.35798392 = fieldWeight in 4471, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4471)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Issue
    W3C Working Group Note 28 August 2008.
  12. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.01
    0.012824517 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = product of:
          0.0769471 = sum of:
            0.0769471 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0769471 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, 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=6048)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  13. Tudhope, D.: Knowledge Organization System Services : brief review of NKOS activities and possibility of KOS registries (2007) 0.01
    0.012824517 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = product of:
          0.0769471 = sum of:
            0.0769471 = weight(_text_:22 in 100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0769471 = score(doc=100,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  14. McCathieNevile, C.; Méndez Rodríguez, E.M.: Library cards for the 21st century (2006) 0.01
    0.011203195 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = product of:
          0.06721917 = sum of:
            0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06721917 = score(doc=240,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 240, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=240)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents several reflections on the traditional card catalogues and RDF (Resource Description Framework), which is "the" standard for creating the Semantic Web. This work grew out of discussion between the authors after Working Group on Metadata Schemes meeting held at IFLA conference in Buenos Aires (2004). The paper provides an overview of RDF from the perspective of cataloguers, catalogues and library cards. The central theme is the discussion of resource description as a discipline that could be based on RDF. RDF is explained as a very simple grammar, using metadata and ontologies to semantic search and access. RDF Knitting the Semantic Web Cataloging & Classification Quarterly Volume 43, Numbers 3/4 has the ability to enhance 21st century libraries and metadata interoperability in digital libraries, while maintaining the expressive power that was available to librarians when catalogues were physical artefacts.
  15. OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax (2004) 0.01
    0.011203195 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = product of:
          0.06721917 = sum of:
            0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 4683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06721917 = score(doc=4683,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 4683, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4683)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This description of OWL, the Web Ontology Language being designed by the W3C Web Ontology Working Group, contains a high-level abstract syntax for both OWL DL and OWL Lite, sublanguages of OWL. A model-theoretic semantics is given to provide a formal meaning for OWL ontologies written in this abstract syntax. A model-theoretic semantics in the form of an extension to the RDF semantics is also given to provide a formal meaning for OWL ontologies as RDF graphs (OWL Full). A mapping from the abstract syntax to RDF graphs is given and the two model theories are shown to have the same consequences on OWL ontologies that can be written in the abstract syntax.
  16. SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Primer (2009) 0.01
    0.011203195 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = product of:
          0.06721917 = sum of:
            0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 4795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06721917 = score(doc=4795,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 4795, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4795)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Issue
    W3C Working Group Note 18 August 2009.
  17. Zhang, L.: Linking information through function (2014) 0.01
    0.011203195 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = product of:
          0.06721917 = sum of:
            0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 1526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06721917 = score(doc=1526,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 1526, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1526)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    How information resources can be meaningfully related has been addressed in contexts from bibliographic entries to hyperlinks and, more recently, linked data. The genre structure and relationships among genre structure constituents shed new light on organizing information by purpose or function. This study examines the relationships among a set of functional units previously constructed in a taxonomy, each of which is a chunk of information embedded in a document and is distinct in terms of its communicative function. Through a card-sort study, relationships among functional units were identified with regard to their occurrence and function. The findings suggest that a group of functional units can be identified, collocated, and navigated by particular relationships. Understanding how functional units are related to each other is significant in linking information pieces in documents to support finding, aggregating, and navigating information in a distributed information environment.
  18. LeBoeuf, P.: ¬A strange model named FRBRoo (2012) 0.01
    0.011203195 = product of:
      0.033609584 = sum of:
        0.033609584 = product of:
          0.06721917 = sum of:
            0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 1904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06721917 = score(doc=1904,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 1904, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1904)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries and museums developed rules for the description of their collections prior to formalizing the underlying conceptualization reflected in such rules. That formalizing process took place in the 1990s and resulted in two independent conceptual models: FRBR for bibliographic information (published in 1998), and CIDOC CRM for museum information (developed from 1996 on, and issued as ISO standard 21127 in 2006). An international working group was formed in 2003 with the purpose of harmonizing these two models. The resulting model, FRBROO, was published in 2009. It is an extension to CIDOC CRM, using the formalism in which the former is written. It adds to FRBR the dynamic aspects of CIDOC CRM, and a number of refinements (e.g. in the definitions of Work and Manifestation). Some modifications were made in CIDOC CRM as well. FRBROO was developed with Semantic Web technologies in mind, and lends itself well to the Linked Data environment; but will it be used in that context?
  19. Papadakis, I. et al.: Highlighting timely information in libraries through social and semantic Web technologies (2016) 0.01
    0.010687098 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = product of:
          0.06412259 = sum of:
            0.06412259 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06412259 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2090, 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=2090)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou
  20. Baker, T.; Sutton, S.A.: Linked data and the charm of weak semantics : Introduction: the strengths of weak semantics (2015) 0.01
    0.009335997 = product of:
      0.028007988 = sum of:
        0.028007988 = product of:
          0.056015976 = sum of:
            0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 2022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056015976 = score(doc=2022,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047327764 = queryNorm
                0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 2022, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2022)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Logic and precision are fundamental to ontologies underlying the semantic web and, by extension, to linked data. This special section focuses on the interaction of semantics, ontologies and linked data. The discussion presents the Simple Knowledge Organization Scheme (SKOS) as a less formal strategy for expressing concept hierarchies and associations and questions the value of deep domain ontologies in favor of simpler vocabularies that are more open to reuse, albeit risking illogical outcomes. RDF ontologies harbor another unexpected drawback. While structurally sound, they leave validation gaps permitting illogical uses, a problem being addressed by a W3C Working Group. Data models based on RDF graphs and properties may replace traditional library catalog models geared to predefined entities, with relationships between RDF classes providing the semantic connections. The BIBFRAME Initiative takes a different and streamlined approach to linking data, building rich networks of information resources rather than relying on a strict underlying structure and vocabulary. Taken together, the articles illustrate the trend toward a pragmatic approach to a Semantic Web, sacrificing some specificity for greater flexibility and partial interoperability.

Languages

  • e 45
  • d 8

Types

  • a 28
  • el 22
  • m 5
  • n 5
  • s 3
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…