1 / 30

Enhancing Europeana Content with Semantics: Towards a Semantic Layer for Improved Access

Explore how semantics can enhance access to Europeana content through relations, inference, and rich descriptions in metadata. Learn about enabling technologies like RDF, OWL, and SKOS, and challenges in semantic conversion and alignment. Discover the goals of Athena WP4 in creating an integrated multilingual thesaurus network.

melissa-becker
Télécharger la présentation

Enhancing Europeana Content with Semantics: Towards a Semantic Layer for Improved Access

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Notes on ThoughtLab / Athena WP4 November 13, 2009 Antoine Isaac aisaac@few.vu.nl

  2. Towards semantics-enabled search • Enhance access to Europeana content by semantics • Exploiting different types of relations • locatedIn, isBornIn, created… • Making use of inference • Finding work showing London for a query on UK • Rich descriptions are already there, in metadata! • Requires to make it properly machine-accessible

  3. Goal: semantics in Europeana v1.0 Building a semantic layer to help accessing content Stefan Gradmann, EDL D2.5

  4. Europeana Thought Lab • http://europeana.eu/portal/thought-lab.html

  5. Semantic autocompletion

  6. Clustering of results

  7. Baseline: matching concepts' label

  8. A "more specific Egypte"??

  9. A "more specific Egypt"?

  10. A concept more specific than the Egypt one

  11. Following other relations

  12. Following other relations - creator

  13. Following other relations - match

  14. Following other relations – death place

  15. Following other relations – death place

  16. Enabling Technologies • RDF • Uniform format for data • Amenable to sharing and linking • OWL • Representation of metadata structures • Amenable to inference • SKOS • Representation of controlled vocabulary • Allows exploitation of legacy knowledge organization • Simple but precious! • E.g., hierarchical relationships for cluster creation

  17. Where are the challenges? • Semantic conversion of data • Using appropriate data models • Enriching legacy metadata • Semantic alignments • Between description ontologies vra:depictsrdfs:subPropertyOfdc:subject • Between concepts in controlled vocabularies iconclass:bird skos:closeMatch ddc:bird

  18. Alignment of semantic references

  19. Where are the challenges? • Semantic alignment (c'ed) • Find correspondences between large vocabularies • In a multilingual context

  20. Athena WP4 Seems to fit very nicely into that challenge  • SKOS & SKOSification • Semantic alignment: From Marie-Véronique & Johann, Lund "The Athena Thesaurus = network of Athena-compliant micro-thesauri with bridges in-between" • Focus on multilingual resources

  21. What kind of semantic alignment? • Fundamental goal: • enhancing semantic interoperability of collections • via the KOSs used for describing them • Several options…

  22. Voc A Voc B Voc C Voc D Voc A Voc B Voc C Voc D Structural models for interoperability(British Standard BS8723) • Unified structure: one KOS • Pairwise relations • Backbone structure

  23. Structural models for interoperability ThoughtLab "data cloud" • Not really corresponding to best practice • More like a "web of data" cloud • But still, a couple of backbone/central nodes • Again, like a "web of data" cloud

  24. At some point, we have to deal with what is there • Especially if it's much better than nothing!

  25. Voc A Athena Thesaurus Voc C Voc D Voc A Voc B Voc C Voc D Goals of Athena WG4? • Athena Integrated Thesaurus • or Athena Thesaurus Network?

  26. Throwing away integrated thesaurus? • Individual manual mappings can already be exploited • Dumping them in the semantic layer will bring interesting stuff • Keeping original vocabularies as access points can be an asset • But a backbone for museum KOSs is likely to bring more • Especially as an umbrella for all those small controlled lists! • An unified multilingual thesaurus is always extremely precious to have

  27. Throwing away integrated thesaurus? Thesaurus integration can be used as a driving scenario • Issue: mapping without application in mind is tricky • What's the "meaning" of a concept? • archeology; netherlands can perfectly be mapped to excavations for translation of book annotations at KB • Thesaurus integration can provide with mapping criteria • Two concepts are equivalent if we can fit them in the same place of a semantic network

  28. Wishlist? • Again, do not forget that intermediate results (individual mappings) can be very precious • If you produce them as part of the process anyway, there should be a way to export them • As SKOS? • Problem: ideally, this would require SKOS versions of the individual "micro-thesauri" • Is that planned?

  29. Thanks!

More Related