SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Knowledge Organization Systems: Managing to the Future Workshop

trang avatar
trang
15 diapositives · 272 Views · Aug 05, 2014

Explore the concepts of RDF, interoperability levels for Dublin Core metadata, open and closed-world data, supporting technologies, and data growth rate in a comprehensive workshop setting. Learn about Validation, Quality, Provenance, Trust, and more!

#knowledge organization systems: managing to the future workshop #knowledge organization systems: managing to the future workshop ppt #powerpoint #presentation
Knowledge Organization Systems: Managing to the Future Workshop - slide 1
01 / 15Knowledge Organization Systems: Managing to the Future Workshop
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Knowledge Organization Systems: Managing to the Future Workshop
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Dublin Core application profiles in context Thomas Baker 22 October 2009 Knowledge Organization Systems: Managing to the Future A joint CENDI/NKOS Workshop National Agricultural Library Beltsville, MD

  2. Resource Resource “Introduction to RDF” in one slide…!  RDF – a grammar for Web links Resource Resource Propertyy Propertyy Resource Resource Propertyy Propertyy Literal (descriptive text or numerical data) http://dublincore.org/workshops/dc6/pp/miller-datamodel.ppt, 1998 “Property” means “is related to”.

  3. Interoperability Levelsfor Dublin Core metadata Shared validatable constraints • 4: Description Set Profile Interoperability • Shared formal vocabularies and constraints in records Shared model for “records” • 3: Description Set syntactic interoperability • Shared formal vocabularies in exchangeable records Shared formal-semantic model • 2: Semantic interoperability • Shared vocabularies based on formal semantics Shared (natural-language) definitions • 1: Informal interoperability • Shared vocabularies defined in natural language http://dublincore.org/documents/interoperability-levels/

  4. Open- and closed-world Shared constraints Open-world data optimized for specific environments. Shared model for “records” Open-world data captured in manageable records. Shared formal-semantic model “Open-world” data. Shared (natural-language) definitions Data in silos. “Intra-operability” within silos.

  5. Supporting technologies Shared constraints DCMI Description Set Profile. SPARQL Query Patterns. Shared model for “records” DCMI Abstract Model. DC-DS-XML. SPARQL Named Graphs. Shared formal-semantic model Linked data. RDF data. Extracted triples. DC-RDF. DC-HTML. RDFa! Shared (natural-language) definitions Closed systems. Proprietary systems. Web of APIs. DC-XML/2003 and other early DCMI specs.

  6. Deployed base Shared constraints Shared “records” Shared formal-semantic model Shared (natural-language) definitions

  7. Rate of growth Shared constraints Shared “records” Shared formal-semantic model Shared (natural-language) definitions

  8. Which level do you require? Shared constraints Pro: Validation. Quality. Contra: It is “constraining”… Shared model for “records” Pro: Provenance. Trust. Contra: Lack of mature, deployed models. Shared formal-semantic model Pro: Easier to integrate and migrate data. Contra: Harder to design, less tools. Shared (natural-language) definitions Pro: Easier to deploy. Validatable records. Contra: Closed-world. Interoperability by (thousands of) ad-hoc agreements.

  9. Level-1 apps interoperate with shared or mapped schemas Schema A Schema B Schema C same as mapped to

  10. Good level-2 Application Profiles create good triples Profile A Profile B Profile C

  11. Good triples can be merged coherently Profile A Profile B Profile C

  12. Applications come and go… Profile A Profile B Profile C

  13. The data remains

  14. Data quality is independent of profiles used to create it SPARQL Endpoint Queries

  15. tbaker@tbaker.de