Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Semelhante a Building a Standpoints Web & Experiments with Library Linked Data
Semelhante a Building a Standpoints Web & Experiments with Library Linked Data (20)
Mais de jodischneider
Mais de jodischneider (20)
Último
Último (20)
Building a Standpoints Web & Experiments with Library Linked Data
- 1. Building a Standpoints Web & Experiments with Library Linked Data Jodi Schneider WAI meeting, Vrije Universiteit 2011-11-28 Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- 2. W3C Library Linked Data Incubator Group
- 4. Libraries connect to other data
- 10. +1 to fund this ebook gluejar.com
- 13. Building a Standpoints Web
- 18. Highlight Controversies Ennals, R., Trushkowsky, B., & Agosta, J. M. (2010). Highlighting Disputed Claims on the Web. In WICOW at WWW 2010.
- 20. “ ELIZA for arguments” Snaith, Lawrence, & Reed, “Mixed initiative argument in public deliberation,” ODET 2010
- 22. Calculate best options (non-contradictory opinions) Wyner, van Engers, & Bahreini. From Policy-making Statements to First-order Logic. EGOV 2010
- 27. Long, complicated discussions. D. Taraborelli, G.L. Ciampaglia (2010) Beyond Notability. Collective Deliberation on Content Inclusion in Wikipedia. Fourth IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW '10). http://notabilia.net
- 40. Reuse book info on the semweb
- 41. Find relationships between papers & researchers
Notas do Editor
- This talk will be about two topics, both related to the Semantic Web. First I will talk about a W3C incubator group on Library Linked Data, then I will talk about my dissertation research, about argumentation on the semantic web. Title: Building a Standpoints Web & Experiments with Library Linked Data Abstract: This talk will cover two topics: the W3C Library Linked Data Incubator Group, which recently completed its final report, and my Ph.D. research in argumentation on the Social Semantic Web The World Wide Web is a vast source of opinions and viewpoints, embedded in documents, in multimedia, and in the messages people write. Yet making sense from these opinions is challenging, since they are dispersed across different websites and media, with no explicit indication of when people are making the same point, or giving different justifications for the same conclusion. Our vision is to make sense and create knowledge out of the chaos and contradiction of the social web, by creating a knowledge structure that can embrace and express contradictions. To do so, we focus on connecting opinions to their justifications, defining a "standpoint" as an opinion plus its justification. Our vision is to create a “Standpoints Web” that treats standpoints as first class objects on the Web, connected both to the justifications that people give for them, and to the opposing views on the same topic. The Standpoints Web will be a global knowledge base which can be filtered, queried, and presented for personalized decision-support and for group decision-making. Bio: Jodi Schneider joined the Digital Enterprise Research Institute as a Ph.D. candidate/researcher in October 2009. She holds an M.A. in mathematics and an M.S. in Library and Information Science. Her research interests are in argumentation, scientific and scholarly communication, and the Social Semantic Web. Before joining DERI, Jodi founded an open access journal for library technologists (Code4Lib Journal), was community liaison for the research summary wiki AcaWiki, and worked in academic libraries. She recently coauthored the Final Report of the W3C Library Linked Data Incubator Group. Her current research is on argumentation on the Social Semantic Web, and she serves on the W3C group on Scientific Discourse and Rhetorical Structure in biosciences.
- LLD Incubator Group – chaired by Antoine Issacs, with participation from Dan Brickley
- And in the Social Semantic Web
- And in the Social Semantic Web
- 4.3 For data and systems designers 4.3.1 Design and test user services based on Linked Data capabilities 4.3.2 Create URIs for the items in library datasets 4.3.3 Develop policies for managing Linked Data vocabularies and their URIs 4.3.4 Express library data by re-using or mapping to existing Linked Data vocabularies
- 4.4.1 Preserve Linked Data element sets and value vocabularies Many Linked Data vocabularies are essentially cultural reference works, giving authoritative information about people, places, events, and concepts within regional, national, or international contexts. As such, preservation of Linked Data vocabularies is a natural, and essential, extension of the activity of memory institutions. Linked Data will remain usable twenty years from now only if its URIs persist and can resolve to documentation of their meaning. As keys to the correct interpretation of data, both now and in the future, element sets and value vocabularies are particularly important as objects of preservation. This situation presents libraries with an opportunity to assume a key role in supporting the Linked Data ecosystem. 4.4.2 Apply library experience in curation and long-term preservation to Linked Data datasets Much of the content in today's Linked Data cloud is the result of ad-hoc, one-off conversions of publicly available datasets into RDF and is not subject to regular accuracy checks or maintenance updates. With their ethos of quality control and commitment to long-term maintenance, libraries have a significant opportunity to take a key role in the important (and hitherto neglected) function of curating Linked Data as an extension of their existing mission. By curating and maintaining the resources described within datasets as truly linkable objects, libraries can reap the benefits of opening their data for value-added contributions from other communities. Adding links to data from biographers or genealogists, for example, could enrich library resource descriptions with data not usually provided by libraries, and could greatly improve the discovery and navigation of library collections.
- Now I work in the Social Semantic Web
- And in the Social Semantic Web
- Imagine you had the perfect knowledge representation
- Task-specific conversation
- “ What is the best point-and-shoot camera?” “ Should I vaccinate my children?” Sindice SIOC widget: Shows posts, comments, and topics, from across the Web from sites which use the SIOC ontology. : http://www.johnbreslin.com/taxonomy/term/1606 “if you look at the post author or click into any comments list, each user now has a speech bubble beside the username. Clicking on this bubble will show you posts, comments and topics created by that user across the "SIOC-o-sphere". argumentation ecosystem for social media, aligning Semantic Web models for argumentation with those for social media, AIF (alone) doesn’t solve this (yet) Social Websites may not be in RDF AIF expects argument schemes Social Semantic Web schemes (FOAF, SIOC) mainly model the overall structure.
- Mixed-initiative Generate argument maps from conversations (Arvina, MAgtALO) Populate a knowledge base Maybe change your views
- They don’t say how they extracted these – but they say Someone makes statement (1) Someone else gives (4) as a reason/premise for (1) Someone else gives (3) as an additional reason for (1) (2) Is a counterproposal with a range of supporting reasons === Icons: http://findicons.com/icon/27954/girl_5?id=27964# http://findicons.com/icon/27930/boy_8?id=27939# http://findicons.com/icon/27955/girl_4?id=27965#
- Maximal consistent sets
- Isn’t it funny that people tweet about this
- Screenshot of the article Heath Totten
- Reusability
- Focus on new relationships. paper-paper, paper-researcher, and researcher-researcher Was this method criticized? Any commentary?