Transitioning web application frameworks towards the Semantic Web (master thesis progress report)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Transitioning web application frameworks towards the Semantic Web (master thesis progress report)

on

  • 7,833 views

Presents the results of a survey of 54 Semantic Web applications and shows how they fit into 6 broad application types/patterns. For every pattern the capabilities, requirements and components are ...

Presents the results of a survey of 54 Semantic Web applications and shows how they fit into 6 broad application types/patterns. For every pattern the capabilities, requirements and components are presented.

The full version of the master thesis is available at: http://eyaloren.org/pubs/heitmann-thesis.pdf

The survey itself is available at http://activerdf.org/survey

Statistics

Views

Total Views
7,833
Views on SlideShare
7,699
Embed Views
134

Actions

Likes
8
Downloads
332
Comments
0

4 Embeds 134

http://blog.artisan.co.nz 125
http://www.slideshare.net 7
http://blog.daum.net 1
http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Transitioning web application frameworks towards the Semantic Web (master thesis progress report) Transitioning web application frameworks towards the Semantic Web (master thesis progress report) Presentation Transcript

    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Transitioning web application frameworks towards the Semantic Web (Master thesis progress report) Benjamin Heitmann Chapter 1  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • Overview Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Part 1: Introduction  About me  Example use case and Problem Statement  Methodology  Part 2: Contributions  Survey of 54 Semantic Web applications and papers  Analysis of requirements based on application types  In Progress: Evaluation of current framework approaches  Part 3: Outlook  2 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Introduction Chapter 3  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • About me Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Research topic: software engineering for the  Semantic Web Helped with ActiveRDF  Wrote the SIOC explorer (based on ActiveRDF)  Started packaging components for reuse  Participation:  Paper about using ActiveRDF to support building a  complete Semantic Web application 4 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Example use case: tracking a music community ? 5 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Solution: Reusing Community Content Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie linked data: web site exporters microformats (contact, location, event) after aggregation: 6 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Problem statement Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie How can we build such an application?  manual implementation is required  Problems:  – high learning curve – no reuse of existing infrastructure and experience Question: Why is there no framework for building a  complete Semantic Web application? Answer: unknown requirements  What common application types?  What components do they share?  7 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Methodology Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Literature General idea: extract  review framework from real prescriptive, applications analyse vision and potential Requirements Evaluation Application Survey of current types and descriptive, approaches components based on existing implementations 8 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Preliminary results of Semantic Web Application Survey Chapter 9  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • Working Definition: Semantic Web Application Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie 1. Every application allows the user to perform a specific task  2. This leads to the requirements: User: requires an interface  to perform: requires application logic  the task: is represented by data  3. To solve the task by utilising the Semantic Web the support of Semantic Web standards is required  e.g. RDF, RDF Schema, SPARQL or OWL  10 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • The survey Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie NASA Museum Flink Dbin Semantic Annotea Finland Organizer Semantic Foafing Bibster MusiDB Swoogle Media the music Wiki Paper RDF FOAF Fungal Confoto Puppy Homepage Map Web Personal CS Aktive Publication Anno Terra Seco DOPE Space Reader http://activerdf.org/survey/ 54 applications, 34 properties 11 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Sources of the survey Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Semantic Web Challenge (at ISWC)  90 % of entries fit definition  41 entries in total  results from 2003 to 2006 available  Semantic Scripting Challenge (at ESWC)  all entries fit definition  13 entries without overlap from Sem. Web Challenge  results from 2005 to 2007 available  Both challenges required:  description of implementation and capabilities  published as paper  12 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Excluded source Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Sweet Tools List  contains 542 “tools”  privately maintained by Michael K. Bergman  Reasons for exclusion  time constraints  most entries have no academic publication  more then 50 % of them do not fit application definition  all of them are general purpose tools  majority can only be used to build parts of an application  13 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Acquiring the data Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie source for data: papers, code mostly unavailable   iterative process: look at applications  create new properties  many projects did not specify implementation at all   incomplete descriptions or properties from literature review lead to “unspecified” properties  Disclaimer: Validation of data by authors of the papers in the future  14 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Application Types Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie majority: semantic  portal 5  only one third support 5 editing 5 31 6 semantic portal 7 semantic annotation semantic repository not an application semantic authoring semantic desktop application 15 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Viewer/Browser Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: FOAF Map   Reads FOAF Files  puts locations of People on Google Maps 16 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Portal Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example:  Museum Finnland  Integrates data about artefacts from multiple museums  allows faceted browsing  recommends similar items 17 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Annotation Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example:  Confoto  Add meta data about people and events to photos 18 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Repository Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: NASA Semantic Organizer   Add documents and binary files  Annotate them with semantic metadata 19 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Authoring Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example:  Semantic MediaWiki  Add semi- structured information  Add schema  View information 20 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Desktop Application Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: DBin   enables sharing of data about specific topics  provides tools to build a community around the topic 21 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Web Standards and Schemas Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie RDF support: 80%  RDF 44 OWL support: OWL  24 50% other query langs 8 SPARQL SPARQL support 7  RDFS as high as 6 DAML previous query 3 languages 9 18 27 36 45 Many projects  use custom others 34 schema Dublin Core 4 RSS 1.0 7 Even Standard  FOAF 9 schemas used unspecified 12 mostly once private 14 (“others”) 9 18 27 36 45 22 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Implementation Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie RDF Libraries Scripting Languages Languages 11 2 3 5 2 4 10 2 19 16 3 3 5 Sesame RAP (PHP) Ruby Jena Scripting Python ActiveRDF (Ruby) Java Perl RDFLib (Python) Prolog PHP Redfoot Redland 25% of all projects did not specify implementation  23 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Architecture Types Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie majority: centralised   second biggest: 6 decentralised and peer 3 to peer architecture 6 32 8 centralised server decentralised server network peer to peer stand alone app other 24 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Application Domains Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Knowledge Management 17 Infrastructure 9 Publishing 9 Research 7 Geospatial Information 7 Life Sciences 3 History 3 Social Network Analysis 2 Search 2 Collaboration 2 Arts 2 4 8 12 16 20 25 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Degree of openness (1) Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie yes no unspecified offline Alignment/ Integration Editing majority: no 5 Can use External Data 15 9 majority: yes 12 13 Data Updates majority: yes semi-automatic manual not needed Schema Updates unspecified majority: no automatic 26 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Degree of openness (2) Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie yes no unspecified Unstructured text supported no real priority Semi-structured data supported equal distribution inferencing of new knowledge no real priority data export / reuse of app as new data source majority: yes, good for Linking Open Data 27 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Unsupported at the moment Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie mash-ups / visualisation of data  multimedia content  collaboration  multilingual content  tracking authorship and provenance  trust  semantic transport layer  (unsupported by definitive majority) 28 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Requirements Chapter 29  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • Application types Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Semantic Authoring Semantic Repository add binary and add semi-structured data and schemas structured data Semantic Semantic Annotation Desktop add only meta data Application Semantic Portal Semantic Viewer integrate and view view one data source multiple sources an application can have multiple types at the same time  30 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Viewer Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: FOAF Map   Capabilities: Components:  very simple: just view and  navigate Data interface: to local  or remote store one source with one  schema User Interface:  provides navigation only read access, no  and visualisation editing Application logic: Requirements:   binds data to interface RDF data support  Search  Navigation and  Visualisation of the data domain 31 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Portal Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: Museum Finnland   Capabilities: Components:  Uses multiple different data  Crawler: aggregate  sources data from different Requirements: (remote) sources  Integration Service:  Integration of multiple data  integrate data and sources schema Alignment of multiple  Persistence layer:  schemas materialise the Object Consolidation  integration results support for Semantic Web  data and schema formats 32 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Annotation Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: Confoto  Components:  Capabilities:  annotate resources with meta Annotation Interface:   data but do not add new ones guides user in resource annotation Requirements:  Persistence layer:  Write support in User  storage for user Interface annotation Write support in persistence  33 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Repository Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: NASA Semantic  Organizer Components:   Capabilities: Repository Interface:  allows adding of add new binary resources  resources add new structured data  Content or document  annotate existing data  management service: Requirements: provides versioning  and permissions Integration of user provided  Binary repository:  data: stores binary data – binary data – structured data 34 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Authoring Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: Semantic  Components: MediaWiki  Authoring interface:  Capabilities:  guides user in creating add and edit semi-structured  semi-structured data data Semi-structured  add and edit schemas  persistence: no Requirements:  enforcing of schema, runtime updates supports semi-structured  possible data runtime evolution of data and  schema 35 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Semantic Desktop Application Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Example: DBin  Components:   Capabilities: Rich Interface: locally  Rich user interface  executed, low latency Desktop Integration  Desktop Integration:  Requirements:  use and integrate local supports Semantic Web data data and schema  local execution of application  36 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie In progress: evaluation Chapter 37  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • First Evaluation Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie View ActiveRDF  together with Controller Ruby on Rails ActiveRDF fits  transparently into the Model Ruby on Rails Active Active architecture Resource RDF ActiveRDF bridges the gaps between data models   Allows reusing the Rails eco-system:  libraries and components 38 of 18 Benjamin Heitmann and Eyal Oren
    • Supported Application Types Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Semantic Viewer:  low effort  Data Source: ActiveRDF provides remote or local RDF  source Visualisation: Rails supports AJAX  Application logic: object oriented access to RDF triples  Semantic Portal:  medium effort  Crawler: manual implementation, reuse Ruby libraries  Integration Service: manual implementation  Persistence Layer: ActiveRDF supports read-write access  39 of 18 Benjamin Heitmann and Eyal Oren
    • Unsupported Application Types Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie High effort for implementation:  all other application types  Semantic Annotation:  – Annotation Interface must be bound to RDF data Semantic Repository:  – Management of documents and structured data has to be integrated into semantic part of application Semantic Authoring:  – semi-structured capabilities of user interface must be implemented – online updates of schema and data have to be visible in user interface Semantic Desktop Application:  – possible by using Joyent Slingshot: Rails Desktop Integration 40 of 18 Benjamin Heitmann and Eyal Oren
    • Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Outlook Chapter 41  Copyright 2007 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. www.deri.org
    • ToDo for Master Thesis Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Validate results of survey:  ask paper authors for corrections  Evaluate more approaches to support semantic web  application development possible candidates: about 10  depends on availability of papers or source code  Writing:  Write down the results :)  maybe publish something  Should be finished at end of September  42 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann
    • Summary Digital Enterprise Research Institute www.deri.ie Question: How can we support the development of  Semantic Web applications?  Answer: look at existing Sem Web App publications which describe:  – capabilities – implementation derive requirements from those apps  Results:  6 types of semantic applications  Requirements and components for each type  Allows evaluation of current approaches  Recommendations for future Sem Web App frameworks  43 of 42 Benjamin Heitmann