International Journal on Digital Libraries

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 49–61

A sharing-oriented design strategy for networked knowledge organization systems

  • Ryan Shaw
  • Adam Rabinowitz
  • Patrick Golden
  • Eric Kansa
Article

Abstract

Designers of networked knowledge organization systems often follow a service-oriented design strategy, assuming an organizational model where one party outsources clearly delineated business processes to another party. But the logic of outsourcing is a poor fit for some knowledge organization practices. When knowledge organization is understood as a process of exchange among peers, a sharing-oriented design strategy makes more sense. As an example of a sharing-oriented strategy for designing networked knowledge organization systems, we describe the design of the PeriodO period gazetteer. We analyze the PeriodO data model, its representation using JavaScript Object Notation-Linked Data, and the management of changes to the PeriodO dataset. We conclude by discussing why a sharing-oriented design strategy is appropriate for organizing scholarly knowledge.

Keywords

NKOS Periodization Service-oriented architecture  Semantic web JSON-LD 

References

  1. 1.
    Allen, J.F., Ferguson, G.: Actions and events in interval temporal logic. J. Log. Comput. 4(5), 531–579 (1994). doi:10.1093/logcom/4.5.531
  2. 2.
    Austin, D., Barbir, A., Ferris, C., Garg, S.: Web services architecture requirements. In: Technical Report, W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/wsa-reqs/ (2004)
  3. 3.
    Binding, C., Tudhope, D.: KOS at your service: programmatic access to knowledge organisation systems. J. Digit. Inf. 4(4) (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruza, P.D.: Hyperindices: a novel aid for searching in hypermedia. In: Proceedings of the First European Conference on Hypertext, pp. 109–122. Cambridge University Press, Versailles (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bryan, P., Nottingham, M.: RFC6902: javascript object notation (JSON) patch. In: Technical Report, IETF. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6902 (2013)
  6. 6.
    Chacon, S., Straub, B.: Pro Git, 2nd edn. Apress, New York. http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 (2014)
  7. 7.
    Collier, G.H.: Thoth-II. In: Proceeding of the ACM Conference on Hypertext—HYPERTEXT ’87, pp. 269–289. ACM Press, New York (1987). doi:10.1145/317426.317446
  8. 8.
    Davies, R.: Working Session 2: Functional Model. http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/SESS2.html (1998)
  9. 9.
    Dombrowski, Q.: What ever happened to project bamboo? Lit. Linguist. Comput. 29(3):326–339 (2014). doi:10.1093/llc/fqu026
  10. 10.
    Draheim, D.: The service-oriented metaphor deciphered. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. 4(4), 253–275 (2010). doi:10.5626/JCSE.2010.4.4.253 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dusseault, L., Snell, J.: RFC5789: PATCH method for HTTP. In: Technical Report, IETF. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789 (2010)
  12. 12.
    Fielding, R., Reschke, J.: RFC7231: hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP/1.1): semantics and content. In: Technical Report, IETF (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fielding, R.T.: Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-Based Software Architectures. PhD thesis, University of California, Irvine. https://www.ics.uci.edu/fielding/pubs/dissertation/top.htm (2000)
  14. 14.
    Foster, I.: Service-oriented science. Science (New York, NY) 308(5723), 814–7 (2005). doi:10.1126/science.1110411 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fouilland, F., Frasca, M., Pelagatti, P.: Monte Casasia (Ragusa). Campagne di scavo 1966, 197273 nella necropoli indigena. Not. Degli Scavi Antich. 5–6, 323–583. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/758533779 (1995)
  16. 16.
    Garshol, L.M.: Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic maps! making sense of it all. J. Inf. Sci. 30(4), 378–391 (2004). doi:10.1177/0165551504045856 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haak, L.L., Fenner, M., Paglione, L., Pentz, E., Ratner, H.: ORCID: a system to uniquely identify researchers. Learn. Publ. 25(4), 259–264 (2012). doi:10.1087/20120404 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hill, L., Koch, T.: Networked knowledge organization systems: introduction to a special issue. J. Digit. Inf. 1(8). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/32/33 (2001)
  19. 19.
    Hjørland, B.: Semantics and knowledge organization. Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol. 41, 367–405 (2007). doi:10.1002/aris.2007.1440410115
  20. 20.
    Hobbs, J.R., Pan, F.: Time ontology in OWL. In: Tecnical Report, W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ (2006)
  21. 21.
    Jones, M., Hardt, D.: RFC6750: the OAuth 2.0 authorization framework: bearer token usage. In: Technical Report, IETF. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6750 (2012)
  22. 22.
    Kunze, J., Rodgers, R.: The ARK identifier scheme. In: Technical Report, Internet Engineering Task Force. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kunze-ark-18 (2013)
  23. 23.
    Kunze, J.A.: Towards electronic persistence using ARK identifiers. In: IWAW/ECDL 3rd Annual Workshop Proceedings. http://bibnum.bnf.fr/ecdl/2003/proceedings.php?f=kunze (2003)
  24. 24.
    Lorrio, A.J., Zapatero, G.R.: The celts in Iberia: an overview. e-Keltoi 6, 167–254. http://www.uwm.edu/celtic/ekeltoi/volumes/vol6/6_4/lorrio_zapatero_6_4.html (2005)
  25. 25.
    Miles, A., Bechhofer, S.: SKOS simple knowledge organization system reference. In: Technical Report, W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/ (2009)
  26. 26.
    Page, K.R., De Roure, D.C., Martinez, K.: REST and linked data. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on RESTful Design—WS-REST ’11, p. 22. ACM Press, New York (2011). doi:10.1145/1967428.1967435. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1967428.1967435
  27. 27.
    Rabinowitz, A.: GeoDia: or, navigating archaeological time and space in an American College classroom. In: CAA2012 Proceedings of the 40th Conference in Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, Southampton, pp. 259–268. http://dare.uva.nl/document/516092#page=260 (2012)
  28. 28.
    Ren, M., Lyytinen, K.J.: Building enterprise architecture agility and sustenance with SOA. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 22. http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol22/iss1/4/ (2008)
  29. 29.
    Schulte, W.R.: Service oriented architectures, Part 2. In: Technical Report, Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/doc/302869/service-oriented-architectures- (1996)
  30. 30.
    Schulte, W.R., Natis, Y.V.: Service oriented architectures, Part 1. In: Technical Report, Gartner. https://www.gartner.com/doc/302868/service-oriented-architectures- (1996)
  31. 31.
    Shaw, R., Golden, P.: Taking entity reconciliation offline. In: Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 50(1), pp. 1–4. doi:10.1002/meet.14505001107 (2013)
  32. 32.
    Sporny, M., Longley, D., Kellogg, G., Lanthaler, M., Lindström, N.: JSON-LD 1.0: a JSON-based serialization for linked data. In: Technical Report, W3C. http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/ (2014)
  33. 33.
    Starr, J., Willett, P., Federer, L., Horning, C., Bergstrom, M.: A collaborative framework for data management services: the experience of the University of California. J. eSci. Librariansh. 1(2), 109–114. doi:10.7191/jeslib.2012.1014. http://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jeslib/vol1/iss2/7 (2012)
  34. 34.
    Stokstad, M., Cothren, M.W.: Art History, 5th edn. Pearson, Boston (2013)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    The Open Group: Service Oriented Architecture: What Is SOA? http://www.opengroup.org/soa/source-book/soa/soa.htm (2013)
  36. 36.
    Tudhope, D., Koch, T.: New applications of knowledge organization systems: introduction to a special issue. J. Digit. Inf. 4(4). https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/issue/view/20 (2004)
  37. 37.
    Verborgh, R.: DBpedia now available as triple pattern fragments. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2014Oct/0293.html (2014)
  38. 38.
    Zeng, M.L.: NKOS (networked knowledge organization systems). http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/ (2014)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryan Shaw
    • 1
  • Adam Rabinowitz
    • 2
  • Patrick Golden
    • 1
  • Eric Kansa
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Information and Library ScienceThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Department of ClassicsThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  3. 3.Open ContextUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations