Case Studies - Semantic Web Portal Project

looneyvillebiologistInternet και Εφαρμογές Web

21 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 7 μήνες)

83 εμφανίσεις

Case Studies

for Semantic Web Portal
Technologies

Anna V. Zhdanova

DERI
-
Innsbruck,

8 March 2004

Overview


Introduction


Case study 1 (semanticweb.org)


Case study 2 (eTourism)


Case study 3 (PeopleSearch&Compare)


Conclusions


Note: Case study is also referred as CS further

General Picture

We are here, thus applications of SW
-
portal technologies are needed

Why case studies and
specifications are mutually useful

Case studies help specifications to become perfect

Specifications help case studies to become real

Basic Facilities

Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org


“We aim to bring together research groups,
research projects, software developers and
user communities in the Semantic Web
area.”


Mission statement



Basic facilities should support

whatever was meant

Target Domain/Our Expertise in It

Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org


Domain is not really popular, very narrow
(but deep

)


P2P


We are the experts here! No external
expertise is needed

What’s Cool?

Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org


It will be possible to say that
semanticweb.org is a Semantic Web portal


How Will It Be Achieved?

Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org

DERI
-
Galway will take care and do all the work
with assistance of DERI
-
Innsbruck on
common parts/technologies in

intersection
-
of(CS1, union
-
of(CS2, CS3))

.

Extensions

Case Study 1: SemanticWeb.org


Extensive merging into “institute” (DERI)
portal


Reuse of the same techniques in any other
research community portal

Basic Facilities

Case Study 2: eTourism


Allow tourism businesses to advertise themselves
effectively (semantic annotation)


Allow tourist to find precisely what they want
(intelligent search)


For: Satisfying specific tourist needs, e.g.

“I want a room with kitchen facilities

In a hotel in Tirol not far from

Axamer Lizum and with a boat rental

nearby.”


Target Domain/Our Expertise in It

Case Study 2: eTourism


Domain of tourism is popular, broad,
especially relevant to Austria


B2C


We are not experts in tourism => Austrian
companies working in tourism are to be
involved for ontology

adaptation, development

and usage of portal

in general

What’s Cool?

Case Study 2: eTourism


Usefulness of having a semantic annotation for a
specific hotel, restaurant or other tourist businesses


WORM: Modify it once, and the changes are automatically
communicated to all systems that use this data


It can be used by services that generate/update automatically
businesses’ web
-
pages


isn’t it nice?


It will be used in the eTourism portal to advertise
businesses


Businesses will get annotated

easily (relatively): usage

of linguistic tools is expected


Multilingual access


How Will It Be Achieved?

Case Study 2: eTourism


DERI
-
Innsbruck will take care and do all the
work with assistance of DERI
-
Galway on
common parts/technologies in


intersection
-
of(CS1, union
-
of(CS2, CS3))

.


Cooperation with Mondeca on using ITM and
with VisioLab on using

general ontology on tourism


Cooperation with local

Austrian tourist companies

on local tourism issues



Extensions

Case Study 2: eTourism


Web
-
services
: This case study is planned to
be aligned with the eTourism case study in
WSMO. WSMO eTourism case study will
enrich eTourism SW portal case study with
dynamic features such as support for making
reservations for train tickets or hotels.

Basic Facilities

Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


Allow users to say whatever they want about
themselves (semantic annotation, collaborative
ontology engineering)


Allow users to find whatever whoever said about
themselves (intelligent search)



For: search of a friend, date, boss,

employee, relative, ex
-
classmate, etc.


compare anyone with others:

self
-
assessment,


staff evaluation, etc.


Target Domain/Our Expertise in It

Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


Domain is highly popular, also the most
broad domain of the existing ones


P2P


We are not really experts… but have
understanding why people may need to
search over and compare

people’s profiles

=> external expertise is

not necessary (at least

in the beginning)


What’s Cool?

Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


Usefulness of having a personal semantic
annotation


WORM: Modify it once, and the changes are automatically
communicated to all systems that use your personal data


It can be used by services that generate/update automatically
your web
-
page or CV


isn’t it nice?


It will be used in the people’s portal to connect people


High flexibility in what can be

specified


Users do not just passively fill in

specified slots, but also collaboratively

extend an ontology that describes any

imaginable aspect of a class “Person”


How
Will It Be Achieved?


Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


DERI
-
Innsbruck will take care and do all the
work with assistance of DERI
-
Galway on
common parts/technologies in


intersection
-
of(CS1, union
-
of(CS2, CS3))

.


Extensions

Case Study 3: PeopleSearch&Compare


Web
-
services
: Using Web
-
services to
search/compare people’s profiles


Extensive merging into “institute” (DERI)
portal


in terms of representation of
information about people, their skills


Personal information

exchange and personnel

evaluation at an enterprise

Added value of metadata

(Adapted to CS3)

Directions for Development

in CS1, CS2, CS3 (more or less)

CS1

CS2

CS3

Web
services

?

at first less,
later more

at first less,
later more

Ontology
management
(collaboration
support)

?

less

more

Linguistics
(static web page
annotation)

?

more

less

Semantic
Web user
interfaces

?

more, but
less than in
CS3

more

The end (so far)