Jones Annotated Bibliography

drillchinchillaInternet και Εφαρμογές Web

21 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 8 μήνες)

80 εμφανίσεις



Jones Annotated Bibliography


1

Running head: SEMANTIC WEB ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY












The Semantic Web:

An Annotated Bibliography

Martha Jones

Emporia State University












Jones Annotated Bibliography


2


The Semantic Web: An
Annotated Bibliography



1
Berners
-
Lee, T. & Fischetti, M. (1999).
Machines and t
he web. In

T.

Berners
-
Lee,
&
M.
Fischetti,
Weaving

the web:

The original design and ultimate destiny of the World Wide
Web by its inventor
. (
pp.177
-
198).

San Francisco: HarperCollins.



In this chapter,
Tim

Berners
-
Lee, the developer of the World Wide Web,

with the help of
Mark Fischetti, a science writer, outlines
his vision

for
what the World Wide Web could be if its
data

could be processed by machines. There would be semantics created for data on the Web so
that machines could process it and interrelate
it without direct human intervention.

The chapter
presents clear examples of t
he usefulness

of

this idea.

He then gives
a few

specific technologies
and standards that

have been and

will need to be developed in order for this to be able to happen.
He acknow
ledges that developing the architecture for his whole vision will be difficult, but
argues that it can happen.

There is already the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which is an
organization dedicated to fostering the development of the necessary architectu
re, technology
and protocols for the vision to be realized. Dr. Berners
-
Lee shows an enthusiasm and knowledge
of his subject
, but doesn’t completely define what exactly he means by the Semantic Web. See
Marshall and Shipman (2003) below for a discussion of

three different ways the Semantic Web
could be defined. This
chapter
is written for the intelligent person with some acquaintance with
the World Wide Web.

2
Berners
-
Lee, T., Hendler, J. and Lassila, O. (2001). The
Semantic Web
[Electronic version].



Scientific American May 17, 2001.
Retrieved February 27, 2008 from
:
http://www
-


Jones Annotated Bibliography


3

personal.si.umich.edu/~rfr
ost/courses/SI110/readings/In_Out_and_Beyond/Semantic_We
b.pdf

This article is a seminal article in discussion of the Semantic Web.

The authors are all
actively involved in research for the World Wide Web Consortium and have written many
articles on relate
d subjects.
It elaborates further on the concept as written in Berners
-
Lee &
Fischetti (1999).

It presents a vision for what the Semantic Web can be: An extension of the
current World Wide Web where machines can read the content and use inference rules to
interrelate the

content with minimal direct user involvement
.

The authors state that all the uses
for the Semantic Web cannot be anticipated. They envision that the Web will allow anyone
to
express new concepts with a Unique
R
esource
I
ndicator (URI)
.

These

concepts can

then
be
linked by the unifying logical language of the Semantic Web. It will enable much more precise,
and elaborate automated searches than are yet possible.

The authors describe the kinds of
knowledge representation that will need to be cr
eated, the kind of taxonomy and inference rules
that will allow the Semantic Web to be possible.

They end with a grand vision of how “the
Semantic Web can assist the evolution of human knowledge as a whole
.” (Evolution of
Knowledge, para.1). They are very
utopian in their belief of how the world will be transformed
by their technology, but it also is apparent from the article that it will take a lot of work by a lot
of people before it could be realized. This article was also written before the development
of
social
software
, which adds a new dimension to the Web. See
Weibel (2007)
and Gruber (2008)
below for some discussion on the Semantic Web and
social software
.

.



Jones Annotated Bibliography


4

3
Feigenbaum
, L., Herman, I., Hongse
r
meier, T., Neumann, E. and Stephens, S. (2007).


The Semantic Web in action.
Scientific
American. 297(6)

90
-
97. Retrieved February 27,

2008 from: Academic Search Premier via EbscoHost


This art
icle, written by five
prominent developers

of

Semantic Web technologies,
lists
many
specific examples
of how

Semantic Web technology is being used

now, in development of
pharmaceuticals, in health care, and in consumer services.
They use these examples to
show that
Semantic Web technology is working as an enhancement to make the World Wide Web more
useful.

They are very enthusiastic and optimistic about the future of the Semantic Web.

4
.
Graves, M., Constabaris, A. and Brickley, D. (2007). FOAF: Connecting
people on the

Semantic Web.
Cataloging & Classification Quarterly
43
(3/4) 191
-
202.


d
oi:
10.1300/J104v43n03_11





5

Greenberg, J. (2007).

Advancing the Semantic Web via library functions.

Cataloging & Classification Quarterly
43
(3/4) 203
-
225.




d
oi:
10.1300/J104v43n03_12

Jane Greenberg, a professor in the School of Information and Library Science at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, gives a very thorough
and readable pre
sentation

of
issues involved with integrating the Semantic Web community and technology with

the

library
community

and technology. She points out how the mission, function, and spirit
of libraries are
analogous

to the mission, function and spirit of the Se
mantic Web.

She then demonstrates how
much the library community’s experience with collection development, cataloging, reference and
circulation can be used to foster the development of the Semantic Web. She then
points out

the
as yet
minimal integration o
f the Semantic Web development community with the library


Jones Annotated Bibliography


5

community.
She points out some of the factors causing this shortage of librarian participation in
Semantic Web development.
She advocates for
having the Semantic Web community use

more

input
from

li
brarians to help in the development of the Semantic
Web.

Her claim is well argued
and persuasive. This seems to me to be a very important article for librarians and Semantic Web
developers.

6
.
Gruber, T.

(2008).
Collective knowledge systems: Where the Soc
ial Web meets the Semantic
Web
.

Web Semantics: Science, Se
rvices
and Agents on the World Wide Web. 6(1
)

4
-
13
.
doi:

10.1016/j.websem.2007.
11.001


Retrieved March 22, 2008 from:


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_

Tom Gruber writes from his experience as an innovative developer of new technologies that
allow collaboration through computer networks. He is a sof
tware developer and has written
many papers.
He co
-
founded a Web site called RealTravel that combines social software and
some Semantic Web technologies to let users create travel journals and search for information
among others travel journals. In this ar
ticle he uses RealTravel as an example to show how the
two technologies are being combined in a way to enhance the collective knowledge of all the
participants.

He then goes on to say that as more Semantic Web tools are being developed, the
opportunities f
or even more powerful collective systems can be developed.

He writes clearly
with minimal technical language. His paper is interesting and compelling as he shows how the
technology is implemented in the real world in a powerful way.

His example of RealTrav
el
does
not

prove that Semantic Web technology is scalable, i.e. can adapt to

the incre
ased demands of a
larger system, but does show how powerful it is in this one application.



Jones Annotated Bibliography


6

7
Harper
, C. & Tillett, B. (2007). Library of Congress controlled vocabularies

and their

application to the Semantic Web.
Cataloging & Classification Quarterly
43
(3/4) 47
-
68.



d
oi:
10.1300/J104v43n03_04



Corey A
.
Harper
is
Assistant Professor, Metadata
Librarian and Catalog Managem
ent
and Enrichment Team Leader at the
University of Oregon Libraries
.
Barbara
B.

Tillett
is the
chief of the Library of Congress Cataloging Policy and Support Office.
This article gives
specific
detailed examples of

the classif
ication schemes that have been developed by libraries

being
adapted

for
use in the Semantic Web.

They discuss various
developments in integrating
library
classification t
echnology into the Semantic Web. They use much technical terminology

that
needs famili
arity with the subject to understand fully.
They point out that the focus of using
library tools in the Semantic Web has been to bring more exposure to library collections and not
to use these tools in the wider Web.

One point they made that I found partic
ularly cogent is
that
the

Semantic Web community is emphasizing research into encoding ontologies, and not
developing them or deciding on their trustworthiness. Librarians, on the other hand, are experts
on developing
controlled vocabularies.
The authors
g
ive examples on

how librarians can use
their expertise in expanding Semantic Web technology.

8
Lytras
, M.
(2005).
Semantic Web and Information Systems: An Agenda Based o
n Discourse
with
Community Leaders
.
International Journal on Semantic Web and Informati
on

Systems 1(1)
i
-
xii.

Retrieved March 3, 2008 from:


http://www.ijswis.org/IJSWIS_vol_1.html



Jones Annotated Bibliography


7


In this article, editor
Miltiades

D. Lytras
,
a recognized expert in knowledge management
and t
he Semantic Web

and professor at Athens University of Economics and Business
,
introduces the

first issue of a journal devoted to the Semantic Web.
He bases this article on
interviews with key researchers in the Semantic Web.
In the course of the introducti
on he gives a
lucid description
of the different
aspects of the World Wide Web and key issues involved in
research and development of the Semantic Web. He synthesizes his opinions and ideas into well
-
designed diagrams showing how these ideas and concepts i
nterrelate
. He is able to be much
more

specific and comprehensi
ve in defining the Semantic Web

and issues involved in its
development than Berners
-
Lee & Fischetti (1999) and Berners
-
Lee, et al. (2001).

9
Marshall
, C. (2004). Taking a Stand on the Semantic

Web. Texas: Center for the Study of

Digital Libraries. Retrieved February 28, 2008 from:


http://www.csdl.tamu.edu/~marshall/mc
-
semantic
-
web.html




This article
is
based on the author’s participation on

a panel at the World W
ide Web
Conference

in May 2004
.
Marshall is an affiliated researcher at the
Center for the Study of
Digital Libraries

at

Texas A&M Uni
versity
.
It is easy and fun to read, while it makes a clear and
serious argument for
the author’s

ideas. She makes an analogy between the
Semantic Web
and
the odd products that are advertised on late
-
night television:
Just like those odd products, the
Sema
ntic Web

sounds good in theory but it won’t work in actuality.

S
he argues that

the
Semantic Web will need
the kind of infrastructure that makes MARC

work
. According to
Marshall, MARC requires specialized training of catalogers to create appropriate metada
ta and
an outside agency like OCLC and Library of Congress to make sure the records use consistent
terms. There are not similar institutions for crea
ting and maintaining universal Semantic Web
metadata

through many different areas of knowledge
, while ensur
ing interoperability and


Jones Annotated Bibliography


8

consistency.

She argues that it would not be worth the expense and trouble to create similar
support for Semantic Web data

throughout the entire Web
.

Her points
are contradicted by Harper
and Tillett’s article in which they give ex
amples of how such support systems are being created.

10
Marshall, C. & Shipman, F. (2003). Which semantic web?

Proceedings of the
F
ourteenth
A
CM

conference on Hypertext and H
ypermedia

HT ’03.


Retrieved March 11, 2008 from

http://www.ht03.org/papers/pdfs/7.pdf



Frank
. Shipman is Associate Director

at the Center for the Study of Digital Libraries and
Professor

in the Department of Computer Science at Texas A&M University.

Catherine Marshall
is an affiliated researcher at the
Center for the Study of Digital Libraries

at

Texas A&M
University
. The authors argue that discussions of the Semantic Web usually bypass t
he question
of what is possible for the Semantic Web

and

go
right to technical implementation ideas and
standards. This article is an attempt to look at what is theoretically possible for the Semantic
Web

from a broader perspective
.

They come to the conclu
sion from their analysis that of the
three kinds of Semantic Web envisioned, only one is likely to be realized: one that
can integrate
data in specific areas of knowledge

where there is motivation from
the
interests of specific
business
es

or institutions t
o provide the support and infrastructure that would be necessary

to
create the semantics that would be necessary
. They argue that Google
-
like search engines work
well enough for finding most information, so that the extensive infrastructure that might be
n
ecessary to tie the whole Web with
s
emantic t
echnology

would not be
worth the effort. They
also discuss the difficulty of enabling machines to discover “aboutness” especially across
different contexts; this is why they think that the knowledge set and purp
ose needs to be well
-
defined like it could be within certain fields. This is a difficult article for the lay reader to
understand. They seem to be making a similar point as Marshall (2004) does
but
in a more


Jones Annotated Bibliography


9

thorough and technical way. Their arguments seem

worth considering, although they are not
taking into account social software that was not yet fully implemented at the time of this paper.

11
McCathieNevile
, C. & Mendez, E. (2007). Library cards for the 21
st

century.


Cataloging & Classification Quarterly
43
(3/4) 21
-
45.

d
oi:
10.1300/J104v43n03_03


Charles
McCathieNevile worked at the World Wide Web Consortium for six years and
develops software for Opera Software.
Eva

Mendez is
Profes
sor of

Librarianship and
Information
Science Department at
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Facultad De Humanidades, Madrid, Spain
.

Essentially, the authors show how Resource Descriptive Framework (RDF), a Semantic Web technology
can put back some of per
sonalization of bibliographic records that was possible in the pre
-
digital card
catalog.



12
Rogers, G. P. (2007). Roles for semantic technologies and tools in libraries.


Ca
taloging & Classification Quarterly
43
(3/4) 105
-
125.


d
oi:
10.1300/J104v43n03_07

G. Philip Rogers,
MA

is

a Senior Business

Analyst in Instructional and Information Systems
(II
S) at UNC’s School of Public Health
. In this article he goes over basic technologies currently
used by libraries such as Electronic Resource Management modules, discusses some Semantic
Web technologies and gives suggestions for how Semantic technologies mi
ght be used in the
future to enhance library functions.

Shadbolt, N., Hall
, W. and Berners
-
Lee, T. (2006).

The Semantic web revisited.
IEEE Intelligent Systems

96(3
)
21
-
24
.

Retrieved February 27, 2008




Jones Annotated Bibliography


10

from:
http://wwwbruegge.in.tum.de/twiki/pub/Lehrstuhl/WissensbasiertesSoftwareEngineering
WiSe06/Semantic_Web_Revisted.pdf


This article
is written by three professors

in the Department of Electroni
cs and Computer
Sci
ence at Southampton University
who are leaders

in the development of the Semantic Web.

They admit that al
though there has been some implementation of the vision presented in the
original Semantic Web article, (see Berners
-
Lee et. al. (20
01)), there is still not any “large scale,
agent
-
based mediation.” They argue that when Web standards for expressing shared meaning
are well established, there will be such mediati
on. They a
rgue that

there is already significant
progress towards
establis
hing
these
Web standards and they predict eventual success.

13
Sure, Y. &
Studer, R. (2005). Semantic Web technology for digital libraries.
Library


Management 26
(4/5) 190
-
195. Retrieve
d March 22, 2008 from ABI/INFORM Global

via Proquest.


These authors are both professors at the Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe,
in
Karlsruhe, Germany. They give an introduction to the
history and importance

of the Semanti
c
Web in a way that is clear and easy to understand.
Then they discuss some terms and
technologies associ
ated with the Semantic Web.
They define ontology, ontology editors,
annotation tools and inference engines
. They are particularly good at defining the
different layers
of technology that are needed in the Semantic Web and how they fit together. They also briefly
discuss how Semantic Web technologies can help digital libraries.

It is a very
accessible
document although it doesn’t really explain how Semant
ic Web technology will fit into digital
libraries. It just gives



Jones Annotated Bibliography


11









edited by Giorgos Stamou and Stefanos