Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Isaac, A."
  1. Wallis, R.; Isaac, A.; Charles, V.; Manguinhas, H.: Recommendations for the application of Schema.org to aggregated cultural heritage metadata to increase relevance and visibility to search engines : the case of Europeana (2017) 0.03
    0.03346218 = product of:
      0.06692436 = sum of:
        0.05215197 = weight(_text_:open in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05215197 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.24876907 = fieldWeight in 3372, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3372)
        0.014772392 = product of:
          0.029544784 = sum of:
            0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 3372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029544784 = score(doc=3372,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 3372, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3372)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Europeana provides access to more than 54 million cultural heritage objects through its portal Europeana Collections. It is crucial for Europeana to be recognized by search engines as a trusted authoritative repository of cultural heritage objects. Indeed, even though its portal is the main entry point, most Europeana users come to it via search engines. Europeana Collections is fuelled by metadata describing cultural objects, represented in the Europeana Data Model (EDM). This paper presents the research and consequent recommendations for publishing Europeana metadata using the Schema.org vocabulary and best practices. Schema.org html embedded metadata to be consumed by search engines to power rich services (such as Google Knowledge Graph). Schema.org is an open and widely adopted initiative (used by over 12 million domains) backed by Google, Bing, Yahoo!, and Yandex, for sharing metadata across the web It underpins the emergence of new web techniques, such as so called Semantic SEO. Our research addressed the representation of the embedded metadata as part of the Europeana HTML pages and sitemaps so that the re-use of this data can be optimized. The practical objective of our work is to produce a Schema.org representation of Europeana resources described in EDM, being the richest as possible and tailored to Europeana's realities and user needs as well the search engines and their users.
  2. Isaac, A.: Aligning thesauri for an integrated access to Cultural Heritage Resources (2007) 0.03
    0.029814415 = product of:
      0.05962883 = sum of:
        0.03650638 = weight(_text_:open in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03650638 = score(doc=553,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.17413835 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
        0.023122448 = product of:
          0.046244897 = sum of:
            0.046244897 = weight(_text_:access in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.046244897 = score(doc=553,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.29307884 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    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.
    Content
    Präsentation anlässlich des 'UDC Seminar: Information Access for the Global Community, The Hague, 4-5 June 2007'
  3. Isaac, A.; Baker, T.: Linked data practice at different levels of semantic precision : the perspective of libraries, archives and museums (2015) 0.01
    0.013037993 = product of:
      0.05215197 = sum of:
        0.05215197 = weight(_text_:open in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05215197 = score(doc=2026,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.24876907 = fieldWeight in 2026, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2026)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries, archives and museums rely on structured schemas and vocabularies to indicate classes in which a resource may belong. In the context of linked data, key organizational components are the RDF data model, element schemas and value vocabularies, with simple ontologies having minimally defined classes and properties in order to facilitate reuse and interoperability. Simplicity over formal semantics is a tenet of the open-world assumption underlying ontology languages central to the Semantic Web, but the result is a lack of constraints, data quality checks and validation capacity. Inconsistent use of vocabularies and ontologies that do not follow formal semantics rules and logical concept hierarchies further complicate the use of Semantic Web technologies. The Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) helps make existing value vocabularies available in the linked data environment, but it exchanges precision for simplicity. Incompatibilities between simple organized vocabularies, Resource Description Framework Schemas and OWL ontologies and even basic notions of subjects and concepts prevent smooth translations and challenge the conversion of cultural institutions' unique legacy vocabularies for linked data. Adopting the linked data vision requires accepting loose semantic interpretations. To avoid semantic inconsistencies and illogical results, cultural organizations following the linked data path must be careful to choose the level of semantics that best suits their domain and needs.
  4. 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) 0.01
    0.010430394 = product of:
      0.041721575 = sum of:
        0.041721575 = weight(_text_:open in 4796) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041721575 = score(doc=4796,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.19901526 = fieldWeight in 4796, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4796)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Key recommendations of the report are: - That library leaders identify sets of data as possible candidates for early exposure as Linked Data and foster a discussion about Open Data and rights; - That library standards bodies increase library participation in Semantic Web standardization, develop library data standards that are compatible with Linked Data, and disseminate best-practice design patterns tailored to library Linked Data; - That data and systems designers design enhanced user services based on Linked Data capabilities, create URIs for the items in library datasets, develop policies for managing RDF vocabularies and their URIs, and express library data by re-using or mapping to existing Linked Data vocabularies; - That librarians and archivists preserve Linked Data element sets and value vocabularies and apply library experience in curation and long-term preservation to Linked Data datasets.
  5. Isaac, A.: After EDLproject : controlled Vocabularies in TELPlus (2007) 0.01
    0.009461049 = product of:
      0.037844196 = sum of:
        0.037844196 = product of:
          0.07568839 = sum of:
            0.07568839 = weight(_text_:22 in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07568839 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 116, 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=116)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    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".
  6. Isaac, A.; Wang, S.; Zinn, C.; Matthezing, H.; Meij, L. van der; Schlobach, S.: Evaluating thesaurus alignments for semantic interoperability in the library domain (2009) 0.01
    0.0083565265 = product of:
      0.033426106 = sum of:
        0.033426106 = product of:
          0.06685221 = sum of:
            0.06685221 = weight(_text_:access in 1650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06685221 = score(doc=1650,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.4236785 = fieldWeight in 1650, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Thesaurus alignments play an important role in realizing efficient access to heterogeneous cultural-heritage data. Current technology, however, provides only limited value for such access because it fails to bridge the gap between theoretical study and practical application requirements. This article explores common real-world library problems and identifies solutions that focus on the application-embedded study, development, and evaluation of matching technology.
  7. Summers, E.; Isaac, A.; Redding, C.; Krech, D.: LCSH, SKOS and Linked Data (2008) 0.01
    0.005518945 = product of:
      0.02207578 = sum of:
        0.02207578 = product of:
          0.04415156 = sum of:
            0.04415156 = weight(_text_:22 in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04415156 = score(doc=2631,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2631, 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=2631)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  8. Isaac, A.; Schlobach, S.; Matthezing, H.; Zinn, C.: Integrated access to cultural heritage resources through representation and alignment of controlled vocabularies (2008) 0.01
    0.0051173065 = product of:
      0.020469226 = sum of:
        0.020469226 = product of:
          0.040938452 = sum of:
            0.040938452 = weight(_text_:access in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040938452 = score(doc=3398,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.25944903 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - To show how semantic web techniques can help address semantic interoperability issues in the broad cultural heritage domain, allowing users an integrated and seamless access to heterogeneous collections. Design/methodology/approach - This paper presents the heterogeneity problems to be solved. It introduces semantic web techniques that can help in solving them, focusing on the representation of controlled vocabularies and their semantic alignment. It gives pointers to some previous projects and experiments that have tried to address the problems discussed. Findings - Semantic web research provides practical technical and methodological approaches to tackle the different issues. Two contributions of interest are the simple knowledge organisation system model and automatic vocabulary alignment methods and tools. These contributions were demonstrated to be usable for enabling semantic search and navigation across collections. Research limitations/implications - The research aims at designing different representation and alignment methods for solving interoperability problems in the context of controlled subject vocabularies. Given the variety and technical richness of current research in the semantic web field, it is impossible to provide an in-depth account or an exhaustive list of references. Every aspect of the paper is, however, given one or several pointers for further reading. Originality/value - This article provides a general and practical introduction to relevant semantic web techniques. It is of specific value for the practitioners in the cultural heritage and digital library domains who are interested in applying these methods in practice.
    Content
    This paper is based on a talk given at "Information Access for the Global Community, An International Seminar on the Universal Decimal Classification" held on 4-5 June 2007 in The Hague, The Netherlands. An abstract of this talk will be published in Extensions and Corrections to the UDC, an annual publication of the UDC consortium. Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Digital libraries and the semantic web: context, applications and research".
  9. Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schopman, B.; Schlobach, S.; Meij, L. van der: Matching multilingual subject vocabularies (2009) 0.00
    0.0044317176 = product of:
      0.01772687 = sum of:
        0.01772687 = product of:
          0.03545374 = sum of:
            0.03545374 = weight(_text_:access in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03545374 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.22468945 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    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.