The Semantic Web and Libraries

sounderslipInternet and Web Development

Oct 22, 2013 (3 years and 7 months ago)

74 views

Scoil an Léinn Eolais agus na
Leabharlannaíochta UCD


An
Coláiste

Ollscoile
,
Baile

Átha

Cliath
, Belfield,
Baile

Átha

Cliath

4, Eire

UCD School of Information and
Library Studies


University College Dublin,

Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland


LIR Heanet Seminar 2008


The Semantic Web and Libraries


Mary Burke UCD SILS


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

2


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

3


I have a dream for the Web [in which computers]
become capable of analyzing all the data on the
Web


the content, links, and transactions
between people and computers.


Day
-
to
-
day processes of business, education,
research and daily activities will be handled by
machines talking to machines.


The Semantic Web will bring structure to the
meaningful content of Web pages, creating an
environment where software agents roaming
from page to page can readily carry out
sophisticated tasks for users

Tim Berners
-
Lee’s concept of the web

4

Web
-
page


readable by humans but not
by computers e.g.
www.ireland.com


5


The web with meaning.


The semantic web converts web resources from
being readable and displayable by computers to
being understandable by computers.


It adds more structured metadata to web pages
and shares this metadata between multiple
applications and agents.


It enables computers to understand a web page
in the way a human does, so that they can find,
share and integrate information on the web.


It depends on two pillars:
metadata

and
taxonomies
.

What is the Semantic Web?

6


Metadata provides the ability to identify and
exploit relationships between items.


Based on eXtensible Markup Language (XML) and
Resource Description Framework (RDF).


XML (eXtensible Markup Language) facilitates
exchange of data and allows users to add their
own tags.


RDF (Resource Description Framework) encodes
meaning in sets of triples, using XML tags.

Metadata

7


RDF is an XML based framework for describing
web resources, such as the title, author,
modification date, content, and copyright
information of a Web page.


RDF provides a model for data, and a syntax so
that independent parties can exchange and use it.


It uses triples with a structure like the subject,
verb and object of an elementary sentence, e.g.


THE BUILDING is named LIBERTY HALL


LIBERTY HALL is located in DUBLIN


RDF is a W3C Recommendation designed to be
read and understood by computers.


Resource Description Framework (RDF)

8


Taxonomies, related to ontologies, enable
equivalences to be created between items in
different collections which have been described
using different vocabularies


Taxonomies define classes of objects and
relations among them, e.
g.


SKYSCRAPER is a type of BUILDING


BUNGALOW is a ONE STORY BUILDING


HIGHRISE is a BUILDING OF 12 OR MORE STORIES


SKYSCRAPER is equivalent to HIGHRISE ?


GOOSE is a type of EDIBLE FOWL


Taxonomies / Ontologies

9


Web ontology is about the exact description of
web information and relationships between web
information.


OWL is built on top of RDF but has larger
vocabulary and stronger syntax than RDF


OWL is for processing information on the web


OWL was designed to be interpreted by
computers not people


OWL is written in XML


OWL is a web standard


Web Ontology Language (OWL)

10

OWL Example

11

Semantic Web Layers

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/W3c
-
semantic
-
web
-
layers.svg/600px
-
W3c
-
semantic
-
web
-
layers.svg.png


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

13


There are many successful semantic web projects
in a variety of sectors including medicine,
scientific publishing, commerce, libraries, etc.


The area is a significant theme in EU Seventh
Framework Digital Libraries research initiative
(FP7) .



Some examples:


General FOAF, MUSICBRAINZ


Library BRICKS, JeromeDL

Semantic web projects

14


FOAF Friend of a Friend is a machine
-
readable
ontology for describing people, their activities
and their relations to other people and objects
using RDF and OWL.


It can be integrated with library systems to
incorporate bookmarks and annotations by
contacts and experts identified by a user as
“friends”.


http://www.foaf
-
project.org/



Friend of a Friend FOAF

15

Friend of a Friend FOAF

http://www.foaf
-
project.org/

16

Musicbrainz


Large database of music metadata


Over half a million albums


Active links to other types of music information


Enables users to download and exchange metadata for
music collections.


Uses RDF and URIs to enables links to relevant music
web pages, e.g. discographies, biographies, etc.



http://musicbrainz.org/


Musicbrainz
http://musicbrainz.org/

18


B
uilding
R
esources for
I
ntegrated
C
ultural
K
nowledge
S
ervices (BRICKS) is an EU Sixth
Framework (FP6) project for sharing and
integrating digital cultural heritage collections
using open source software (
BRICKS
-

Building
resources for Integrated Cultural Knowledge
Services
).


http://www.brickscommunity.org/


BRICKS

19

BRICKS

20


Social semantic digital library system


Incorporates many features of semantic web in
an operational system


Developed by the semantic web research group
at the Digital Enterprise Research Institute
(DERI) at NUI Galway


Features of this system include individualization
of user profiles, the ability for users to annotate
items, create personal bookshelves, advanced
query facilities, etc.


JeromeDL

21


Describes each resource using three types of
metadata: structure, bibliographic and
community


Delivers services using each of these metadata
types.


Allows for resource description using a range of
controlled vocabularies including:


authority files for authors, editors and
publishers,


classification schemes, e.g. Dewey,


and WordNet dictionary for keywords
.


http://www.jeromedl.org/

JeromeDL

22

JeromeDL

23


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

24


Many semantic web applications also involve
other emerging web technologies including Web
2.0, Web 3.0 and social networking.


Some writers use the terms semantic web and
Web 2.0 interchangeably but …


Web 2.0 includes social networking sites, e.g.
MySpace, Bebo, Facebook, wikis, e.g. Wikipedia,
and folksonomies which evolve from collaborative
tagging.

Semantic Web vs. Web 2.0

25


Web 2.0 is an informal flexible way of integrating
disparate web services.


Web 2.0 requires less dependence on shared
vocabularies


Web 2.0 provides workable rather than totally
perfect solutions.


Web 2.0 focuses on the user interface rather than
on technology or standards.


Web 2.0 encourages users of information services
to create, share, collaborate and interact.


Mary Burke vs. Judith Wusteman

Semantic Web vs. Web 2.0

26


Web 2.0
may

be seen as the direct opposite to
the semantic web with the emphasis of the latter
on standardization, creation of perfect metadata,
using computers to link the metadata, etc.


But

there is general acceptance that the two
technologies are complimentary and can be
integrated, with a semantic web back
-
end and a
Web 2.0 interface.

Semantic Web vs. Web 2.0

27


Web 2.0 social networking sites contribute to the
semantic web as they provide for fuller tagging of
web resources by individuals and groups.


Examples: Del.icio.us for sharing bookmarks and
Flickr for sharing photographs


-
> This social semantic web uses social
interactions on the web to create more complete
knowledge, integrating components from multiple
contributors.


It provides a user driven approach to semantic
web development.


Semantic Web integrated with Web 2.0

28


Wikipedia 3.0 proposal would enrich Wikipedia
through the addition of semantic web features.


By giving semantic web tools to the Wikipedia
community, including librarians, it would be
possible for the user community to help develop
domain specific ontologies.


Wikipedia would then provide answers to
questions instead of links to web pages
containing keywords.

Semantic Web integrated with Web 2.0

29


Censorship and privacy issues arise through
linking of records in different places.


High overhead of time and resources in metadata
and taxonomy creation and maintenance.


Principle of least effort for information seeking.


Merely a type of weak artificial intelligence which
enables well defined problems for narrow subject
areas to be solved using well defined data?


21
st

century buzz
-
word?


OR


As ubiquitous as the web?


Challenges of Semantic Web

30


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

31


Special collections of data with rich metadata
structure can be automatically converted to RDF
and OWL.


Collections where users have commitment to
annotation, tagging and sharing, e.g. readers’
groups.


Collaborative research groups, e.g. multi
-
partner
research teams.


Linking of electronic journal and database
components, e.g.


Metadata
-
> Journal
-
> Article
-
> Versions
accessible in user’s institution

Applications of S W in libraries

32


Jane Greenberg (2007) identifies similarities
between libraries and the semantic web and
presents strong arguments for the applicability of
library functions to the semantic web.


"Collection development" translates to "semantic
web selection“


“Cataloging" to "semantic web 'semantic'
representation"


“Reference" to "semantic web service”


“Circulation" to "semantic web resource use”


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFqmqcv3s4w

Semantic Web and Libraries

33


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

34


We have considerable expertise in the key
components of the semantic web: cataloguing
and classification.


We understand the complexity of information
resources, the importance of metadata and
vocabulary control.


We have developed systems for ensuring
reliability, consistency and quality control.


We have a track record in protecting privacy.


-
> Careers as metadata librarians


-
> We must not leave development of the
semantic web to computer scientists.

Role of Librarians

35


Understand the semantic web


Recognise examples


Compare and contrast semantic web and Web 2.0


Assess role of semantic web in libraries


Assess how librarians can contribute to semantic
web


Plan for the future: social semantic digital library

Lecture Objectives / Outline

36


Personalization of digital libraries is key for future
(Baker, 2006)


Accomplished by using both Web 2.0 and
semantic web. Ferran et al. present a model for
this (2005).


It requires integration of user profiles and search
histories and evaluation.


Feasible on a small scale and in specialized areas
but less so for the wide spectrum of public or
academic library users.


Social Semantic Digital Library

37


Weaving the Web

Fischetti, Mark (Harper Collins
Publishers,1999)
ISBN 0
-
06
-
251586
-
1
(cloth)
ISBN 0
-
06
-
251587
-
X
(paper)


Berners
-
Lee, Tim; James Hendler and Ora Lassila
(May 17, 2001). "
The Semantic Web
".
Scientific
American Magazine
. Retrieved on
2008
-
04
-
10
.


http://www.w3schools.com/semweb/default.asp


http://www.foaf
-
project.org/


http://musicbrainz.org/


http://www.brickscommunity.org/


http://www.jeromedl.org/

http://library.deri.ie/




Links to Examples and Resources (1 of 3)

38


Greenberg, J. (2007). Advancing the Semantic
Web via library functions:


www.haworthpress.com/store/pdffiles/forreps/
gr
eenberg
-
knitting.pdf



ils.unc.edu/mrc/pdf/
greenberg
07advancing.pdf


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFqmqcv3s4w


http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/talis_se
mantic_web.php


http://www.altova.com/semantic_web.html


http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22seman
tic+web%22+library&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search

Links to Examples and Resources (2 of 3)

39


Baker, D. (2006). Digital library futures: a UK HE
and FE perspective.
Interlending and Document
Supply,
34(1), 4
-
8.


Fawzi, M. (July 3 2006).
Wikipedia 3.0: The End
of Google?

Retrieved 10 October 2007, from
http://evolvingtrends.wordpress.com/2006/06/2
6/wikipedia
-
30
-
the
-
end
-
of
-
google/


Ferran, N., Mor, E., & Minguillon, J. (2005).
Towards personalization in digital libraries
through ontologies.
Library Management,
26(4),
206
-
217.




Links to Examples and Resources (3 of 3)

40

Thank you for your attention!

Questions? Comments?

41