Advertisement

Web Standards pp 245-305 | Cite as

Metadata and the Semantic Web

  • Leslie F. Sikos

Abstract

The basic structure of web documents provides the desired appearance and functionality. By default, however, the content is human-readable only. You can use additional technologies to provide meaning to web documents, making them machine-readable and part of the Semantic Web. Many terms have been recently introduced for emerging Semantic Web technologies, but because of the lack of formal definitions, many of the definitions are somewhat fuzzy. For example, because of the potential to perform actions automatically, a new era of the Web has begun, which is denoted as Web 2.0. After gaining popularity on online community portals, some features of the Semantic Web, together with personalization, are now referred to as Web 3.0. There is a wide choice of metadata available, along with microformats and various annotations that can significantly extend the possibilities of web documents. They can also considerably improve the effectiveness of web searches. RDF should be used to add structure to the Web and change conventional search engines that apply brute-force approaches.

Keywords

Encode Scheme Link Element Simple Knowledge Organization System Metadata Element Machine Readable 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Herman I (ed) (2009) How would you define the main goals of the Semantic Web? In: W3C Semantic Web FAQ. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2001/sw/SW-FAQ#swgoals. Accessed 05 June 2011Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sbodio LM, Martin D, Moulin C. Discovering Semantic Web services using SPARQL and intelligent agents. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2010, 8(4):310–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hyvönen E, Mäkelä E, Salminen M, Valo A, Viljanen K, Saarela S, Junnila M, Kettula S. MuseumFinland — Finnish museums on the semantic web. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2005, 3(2–3):224–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bojārs U, Breslin JG, Finn A, Decker S. Using the Semantic Web for linking and reusing data across Web 2.0 communities. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2008, 6(1):21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Celma Ò, Raimond Y. ZemPod: A semantic web approach to podcasting. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2008, 6(2):162–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berners-Lee T (2001) Business Model for the Semantic Web. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Business. Accessed 16 November 2010Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Murphy T (2010) Lin Clark On Why Drupal Matters. Socialmedia. http://socialmedia.net/2010/09/07/lin-clark-on-why-drupal-matters. Accessed 09 September 2010Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hausenblas M, Adida B, Herman I (2008) RDFa — Bridging the Web of Documents and the Web of Data. Joanneum Research, Creative Commons, World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2008/Talks/1026-ISCW-RDFa/. Accessed 19 November 2010Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobie N (ed) (2011) Q&A: Conrad Wolfram on communicating with apps in Web 3.0. Dennis Publishing Ltd. www.itpro.co.uk/621535/q-a-conrad-wolfram-on-communicating-with-apps-in-web-3-0. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ankolekar A, Krötzsch M, Tran T, Vrandečcić, D. The two cultures: Mashing up Web 2.0 and the Semantic Web. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2008, 6(1):70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shannon V (2006) A “more revolutionary” Web. International Herald Tribune. The New York Times Company. www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/technology/23ihtweb.html?scp=1&sq=A+%27more+revolutionary%27+Web&st=nyt. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Adida B, Birbeck M, McCarron S, Herman I (eds) (2010) Abstract. In: RDFa Core 1.1. Syntax and processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. W3C Working Draft. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/. Accessed 22 November 2010Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herman I (2009) W3C Semantic Web Frequently Asked Questions. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/RDF/FAQ. Accessed 16 November 2010Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arenas M, Prud’hommeaux E, Sequeda J (eds) (2010) A Direct Mapping of Relational Data to RDF. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdb-direct-mapping/. Accessed 19 November 2010Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clark K (2010) The RDF Database Market. Clark & Parsia, LLC. http://weblog.clarkparsia.com/2010/09/23/the-rdf-database-market/. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oinonen K (2005) On the road to business application of Semantic Web technology. Semantic Web in Business — How to proceed. In: Industrial Applications of Semantic Web: Proceedings of the 1st IFIP WG12.5 Working Conference on Industrial Applications of Semantic Web. International Federation for Information Processing. Springer Science+Business Media Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nagy M, Vargas-Vera M (2010) Towards an Automatic Semantic Data Integration: Multi-agent Framework Approach. In: Semantic Web. In-Teh, VukovarGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dertouzos LM, Berners-Lee T, Fischetti M (1999) Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by Its Inventor. Harper San Francisco, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bizer C, Heath T, Berners-Lee T. Linked data — The story so far. Semantic Web and Information Systems 2009, 5(3):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Berners-Lee T (2009) Linked Data. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cyganiak R, Jentzsch A. Linking Open Data cloud diagram. http://lod-cloud.net. Accessed 20 July 2011Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yahoo (2010) Flickr — Photo sharing. Yahoo! Inc. www.flickr.com. Accessed 15 October 2010Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Google Webmaster Central Team (2007) Using the robots meta tag. Google Inc. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/03/using-robots-meta-tag.html. Accessed 16 October 2010Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    AOL Inc. (2010) ODP — Open Directory Project. Netscape. www.dmoz.org/. Accessed 16 October 2010Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    TWRP (2007) About the Robots <META> tag. The Web Robots Pages. www.robotstxt.org/meta.html. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sullivan D (2007) Yahoo Provides NOYDIR Opt-Out Of Yahoo Directory Titles & Descriptions. Search Engine Land. Third Door Media. http://searchengineland.com/yahoo-provides-noydir-opt-out-ofyahoo-directory-titles-descriptions-10631. Accessed 16 October 2010Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ontos (2010) OntosMiner. Ontos AG. www.ontos.com/o_eng/index.php?cs=3-2. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu G (ed) (2010) Semantic Web. In-Tech, VukovarGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mellouli S, Bouslama F, Akande A (2010) An ontology for representing financial headline news. doi:10.1016/j.websem.2010.02.001Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Davis I, Newman R, D’Arcus B (2005) Expression of Core FRBR Concepts in RDF. Richard Newman, Ian Davis. http://vocab.org/frbr/core.html. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Creative Commons (2011) Describing Copyright in RDF. Creative Commons Rights Expression Language. Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/ns. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    ODRL (2011) The Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL) Initiative. http://odrl.net. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iannella R (2002) Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL) Version 1.1. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/odrl. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Miles A, Bechhofer S (eds) (2009) SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brickley D (ed) (2006) WGS84 Geo Positioning: an RDF vocabulary. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos.rdf. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Davis I, Galbraith D (2010) BIO: A vocabulary for biographical information. Ian Davis, David Galbraith. http://vocab.org/bio/0.1/. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    IMS (2006) IMS Meta-data Best Practice Guide for IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 Standard for Learning Object Metadata. Version 1.3 Final Specification. IMS Global Learning Consortium. http://www.imsglobal.org/metadata/mdv1p3/imsmd_bestv1p3.html. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Universität Osnabrück (2002) Math-Net RDF Collection. Universität Osnabrück. www.iwiiuk.org/material/RDF/1.1/. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brickley D, Miller L (2007) FOAF Vocabulary Specification 0.9. Dan Brickley, Libby Miller. http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Parada RA (2008) DOAC Vocabulary Specification. Ramon Antonio Parada. http://ramonantonio.net/doac/0.1/. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dumbill E (2011) DOAP. Edd Dumbill. http://trac.usefulinc.com/doap. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lindesay V (2011) Schemaweb. RDF schema directory. VicSoft Ltd. www.schemaweb.info. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Davis I (2006) vocab.org — A URI space for vocabularies. Ian Davis. http://vocab.org. Accessed 21 February 2011Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Aumueller D (2006) Beer Ontology. David Aumueller. www.purl.org/net/ontology/beer.owl. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kanzaki M (2007) Music Vocabulary. The Web KANZAKI. www.kanzaki.com/ns/music.rdf. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sikos LF (2011) VidOnt — the video ontology. http://vidont.org/. Accessed 30 May 2011Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Baumeister J, Seipel D (2010) Anomalies in ontologies with rules. Web Semant, doi:10.1016/j.websem.2009.12.003Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Khan L (2009) Semantic Web and Cloud Computing. In: Research of Dr. Latifur Khan. The University of Dallas. www.utdallas.edu/~lkhan/research.html. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Smarty A (2010) How to Use Various REL Attributes — Learning Microformats. Search Engine Journal. www.searchenginejournal.com/how-to-use-various-rel-attributes-learning-microformats/16144/. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kaply M (2010) Operator Add-on for Firefox. Michael Kaply. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4106/. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    De Bruin R (2010) Tails Export Add-on for Firefox. Robert de Bruin. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2240/. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ryckbost B (2010) Michromeformats Google Chrome extension. Brian Ryckbost. https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/oalbifknmclbnmjlljdemhjjlkmppjjl. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Baranovskiy D (2010) Optimus — Microformats Transformer. Dmitry Baranovskiy. http://microformatique.com/optimus/. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Left Logic (2010) Microformats Bookmarklet. Left Logic Ltd. http://leftlogic.com/projects/microformats_bookmarklet. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Dawson F, Stenerson D (1998) Internet Calendaring and Scheduling Core Object Specification (iCalendar). The Internet Society. www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2445.txt. Accessed 12 November 2010Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Çelik T, Suda B (2010) hCalendar 1.0. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar. Accessed 12 November 2010Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    King R, Çelik T, Mullenweg M (2008) hCalendar Creator. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/code/hcalendar/creator. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Çelik T, Suda B (2010) hCard 1.0. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Dawson F, Howes T (1998) vCard MIME Directory Profile. The Internet Society. www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Çelik T (2005) hCard Creator. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/code/hcard/creator. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Casserly C, Domicone A, Green L, Heung A, Kinkade N, Linksvayer M, Park J, Peters D, Rees J, Roberts A, Rose T, Ruttenberg A, Schultz AJ, Steuer E, Vollmer T, Webber C, Wilbanks J, Yergler N, Yip J et al (eds) (2010) Licenses. Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/. Accessed 17 October 2010Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Çelik T (2005) rel=“license”. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-license. The Microformats Community. Accessed 12 November 2010Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Olbertz D (2010) No to rel=“nofollow”. Fight Spam not Blogs. Dirk Olbertz. http://nonofollow.net. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Çelik T, Marks K (eds), Cutts M, Shellen J (2005) rel=“nofollow”. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-nofollow. Accessed 12 November 2010Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Çelik T, Marks K, Powazek D (2010) rel=“tag”. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag. Accessed 12 November 2010Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Berners-Lee T, Fielding R, Masinter L (2005) Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. The Internet Society. www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Çelik T, Marks K (2010) Vote Links. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/votelinks. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Paul A (2003) Social networking beginning to take shape on the Web. The Seattle Times. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20031229&slug=paul29. Accessed 10 November 2010Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    GMPG (2010) XFN — XHTML Friends network. Global Multimedia Protocols Group. http://gmpg.org/xfn/. Accessed 10 November 2010Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Lewis EP (2008) Getting Semantic With Microformats, Part 2: XFN. Emily P. Lewis. http://ablognotlimited.com/index.php/articles/getting-semantic-with-microformats-part-2-xfn/. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mullenweg M, Çelik T (2004) XFN 1.1 Creator. Global Multimedia Protocols Group. http://gmpg.org/xfn/creator. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Mullenweg M (2010) Exefen. Matthew Mullenweg. http://ma.tt/tools/exefen.php/. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Çelik T (2003) XMDP: Introduction and Format Description. Global Multimedia Protocols Group. http://gmpg.org/xmdp/description. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Çelik T (2010) The adr microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/adr. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Çelik T (2009) The geo microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/geo. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Janes D, Carlyle B, Tantek Çelik T (2010) The hAtom microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sporny M, McEvoy M et al (2010) The hAudio microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/haudio. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Çelik T, Khare R (eds), Arkin A, Donato C, King R (2010) The hListing microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hlisting. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    McEvoy M, Çelik T, Marks K, Hodder M, Begbie R, Kinberg J, Messina C, Rein L, Newell C, Sporny M, Johnson M, McEvoy M (2010) The hMedia microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hmedia. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Malek J, Myles S, Moore M, Ng M, Martin TB (2010) The hNews microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hnews. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Lee P, Myers J, Cook C, Gustafson A (2010) The hProduct microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hproduct. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Lörtsch T (ed), Berriman F, Ward B, Inkster T (2010) The hRecipe microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hrecipe. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    King R, Çelik T, Levine J, Marks K (2010) The hResume microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hresume. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Çelik T, Diab A, McAllister I, Panzer J, Rifkin A, Sippey M (2010) The hReview microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/hreview. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    King R, Cook B, Çelik T, Marks K (2009) The rel-directory microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-directory. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Marks K (2009) The rel=“enclosure” microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-enclosure. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ayers D (2009) The rel=“home” microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-home. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Pedersen AH, Kinberg J, Dedman J, Van Dijk P (2010) The rel-payment microformat Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-payment. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Janes P (2009) The Robot Exclusion Profile. Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/robots-exclusion. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gibson B (2010) The xFolk microformat. Draft Specification. The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/xfolk. Accessed 14 November 2010Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    4K Associates (2009) So you wanna develop a new microformat? The Microformats Community. http://microformats.org/wiki/process. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Hickson I (2010) HTML Microdata. World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/. Accessed 17 October 2010Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Berners-Lee T (2007) Giant Global Graph. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/215. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Berners-Lee T (2007) Giant Global Graph. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/215. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Brickley D (2010) FOAF Project web site. The Friend Of A Friend (FOAF) Project. www.foaf-project.org/. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    QDOS (2010) FOAFNet. QDOS. http://foaf.qdos.com/. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    NetEstate (2010) Friend Of A Friend (FOAF) Search Engine. NetEstate. www.foaf-search.net. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Intellidimension (2010) Semantic Web Search. Intellidimension. www.semanticwebsearch.com/query/. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Quatuo (2010) Search FOAF profiles / Create, manage, store and publish your Friend of a Friend (FOAF) profile — A Semantic Web project. Quatuo. www.quatuo.com. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Dodds L (2010) FOAF-a-matic. www.ldodds.com/foaf/foaf-a-matic.en.html. Leigh Dodds. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Walker J (2010) The Drupal FOAF module. http://drupal.org/project/foaf. Dries Buytaert. Accessed 23 September 2010Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    ISO (2009) Information and documentation — The Dublin Core metadata element set. ISO 15836:2009. International Organization for Standardization. www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=52142. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kunze J, Baker T (2007) The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set. The IETF Trust. www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5013.txt. Accessed 27 August 2011Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    ANSI, NISO (2007) The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set. ANSI/NISO Z39.85. National Information Standards Organization. www.niso.org/kst/reports/standards/kfile_download?id%3Austring%3Aiso-8859-1=Z39-85-2007.pdf⌖=RkGKiXzW643YeUaYUqZ1BFwDhIG4-24RJbcZBWg8uE4vWdpZsJDs4RjLz0t90_d5_ymGsj_IKVa86hjP37r_hFEijh12LhLqJw52B-5udAaMy22WJJl0y5GhhtjwcI3V. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Hillmann D (2005) Syntax Issues. In: Using Dublin Core. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/usageguide/#whichsyntax. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Powell A, Nilsson M, Naeve A, Johnston P, Baker T (2007) DCMI Abstract Model. DCMI Recommendation. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/abstractmodel/. Accessed 25 October 2010Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    DCMI (2010) Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1. DCMI Recommendation. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Accessed 22 October 2010Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Powell A, Wagner H (eds), Weibel S, Baker T, Matola T, Miller E, Johnston P (2007) Namespace Policy for the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI). Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-namespace/. Accessed 26 October 2010Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Powell A, Nilsson M, Naeve A, Johnston P, Baker T (2007) DCMI Abstract Model semantics. In: DCMI Abstract Model. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/2007/02/05/abstract-model/#sect-5. Accessed 26 October 2010Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Hillmann D (2005) Using Dublin Core — The Elements, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/usageguide/elements.shtml. Accessed 11 September 2010Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    DCMI Usage Board (2010) DCMI Metadata Terms. DCMI Recommendation. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/. Accessed 22 October 2010Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Berners-Lee T, Fielding R, Masinter L (2005) RFC 3986: Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. Internet Engineering Task Force. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt. Accessed 26 October 2010Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Johnston P, Powell A (2008) Expressing Dublin Core metadata using HTML/XHTML meta and link elements. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-html/. Accessed 09 November 2010Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Powell A, Johnston P (2003) Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core in XML. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-xml-guidelines/. Accessed 06 November 2010Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Johnston P, Powell A (2008) Expressing Dublin Core Description Sets using XML (DC-DS-XML). Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-ds-xml/. Accessed 07 November 2010Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Phillips A, Davis M (2006) Tags for Identifying Languages. The Internet Society. www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt. Accessed 08 November 2010Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Beckett D, Miller E, Brickley D (2002) Expressing Simple Dublin Core in RDF/XML. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmes-xml/. Accessed 31 October 2010Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Kokkelink S, Schwänzl R (2002) Expressing Qualified Dublin Core in RDF / XML. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-rdf-xml/. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Nilsson M, Powell A, Johnston P, Naeve A (2008) Expressing Dublin Core metadata using the Resource Description Framework (RDF). Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcrdf/. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Nilsson M, Baker T (2008) Notes on DCMI specifications for Dublin Core metadata in RDF. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-rdf-notes/. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Beckett D, McBride B (eds) (2004) Introduction. In: RDF/XML Syntax Specification. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Introduction. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Klyne G, Carroll JJ, McBride B (eds) (2004) Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Davis M, Whistler K (eds) (2010) Unicode Standard Annex #15. Unicode Normalization Forms. The Unicode Consortium. www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/#Norm_Forms. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Ora Lassila O, Swick RR (eds) (1999) Formal Grammar for RDF. In: Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdfsyntax-19990222/#grammar. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Prud’hommeaux E, Seaborne A (eds) (2008) SPARQL Query Language for RDF. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Ogbuji C (ed) (2010) SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Grant J, Beckett D, McBride B (eds) (2004) N-Triples. In: RDF Test Cases. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/#ntriples. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Chris Bizer C, Cyganiak R (2007) The TriG Syntax. Freie Universität Berlin. http://www4.wiwiss.fuberlin. de/bizer/TriG/Spec/. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Carroll JJ, Stickler P (2004) RDF Triples in XML. HP Laboratories. www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2003/HPL-2003-268.pdf. Accessed 21 November 2010Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Beckett D, McBride B (2004) RDF/XML Syntax Specification. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Berners-Lee T, Connolly D (2008) Notation3 (N3): A readable RDF syntax. W3C Team Submission. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/n3/. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Berners-Lee T, Connolly D (2008) Grammar of N3 in EBNF as used in XML 1.1 format. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/grammar/n3-ietf.txt. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Berners-Lee T (2005) Primer: Getting into RDF & Semantic Web using N3. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Prud’hommeaux E, Carothers G (ed), Beckett D, Berners-Lee T (2011) Terse RDF Triple Language. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-turtle-20110809/. Accessed 25 August 2011Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Epimorphics (2010) Jena — A Semantic Web Framework for Java. Epimorphics Ltd. http://openjena.org. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Beckett D (2011) Redland RDF Libraries. Dave Beckett. http://librdf.org. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Aduna (2011) openRDF.org — home of Sesame. Aduna. www.openrdf.org. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Zeldman J, Marcotte E (2009) Designing with Web standards, 3rd edn. New Riders, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Sporny M, Adrian B, Birbeck M (eds), Herman I (2010) RDFa API. An API for extracting structured data from Web documents. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-api/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Adida B, Birbeck M, McCarron S, Herman I (eds) (2010) RDFa Core 1.1. Syntax and processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Birbeck M, McCarron S (2009) CURIE Syntax 1.0. A syntax for expressing Compact URIs, W3C Candidate Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/curie/. Accessed 11 September 2010Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Lewis JR, Moscovitz M (2009) AdvancED CSS. Friends of ED, BerkeleyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Adida B, Herman I (eds) (2011) W3C RDFa Working Group. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Swick R (ed) (2002) Metadata Activity Statement. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/Metadata/Activity.html. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Brickley D, Guha RV, McBride B (eds) (2004) RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/. Accessed 22 February 2011Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Herman I (2010) “Why OWL and not WOL?”. Tutorial on Semantic Web Technologies. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/People/Ivan/CorePresentations/RDFTutorial/Slides.html#%28114%29. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Smith MK, Welty C, McGuinness DL (eds) (2004) The Species of OWL. In: OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. W3C Recommendation. www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#OwlVarieties. Accessed 15 November 2010Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Dean M, Schreiber G (eds), Bechhofer S, van Harmelen F, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2004) OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Hitzler P, Krötzsch M, Parsia B, Patel-Schneider PF, Rudolph S (eds) (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language — Primer. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owlprimer/. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Motik B, Grau BC, Horrocks I, Wu Z, Fokoue A, Lutz C (eds), Calvanese D, Carroll J, De Giacomo G, Hendler J, Herman I, Parsia B, Patel-Schneider PF, Ruttenberg A, Sattler U, Schneider M (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language — Profiles. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/. Accessed 26 August 2011Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Patel-Schneider PF, Horrocks I (eds) (2004) Abstract Syntax. In: OWL Web Ontology Language. Semantics and Abstract Syntax. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owlsemantics-20040210/syntax.html. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Motik B, Patel-Schneider PF, Parsia B (eds), Bock C, Fokoue A, Haase P, Hoekstra R, Horrocks I, Ruttenberg A, Sattler U, Smith M (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owlsyntax/. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Patel-Schneider PF, Motik B (eds), Grau BC, Horrocks I, Parsia B, Ruttenberg A, Schneider M (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Mapping to RDF Graphs. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-mapping-to-rdf-20091027/. Accessed 29 October 2010Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Beckett D, McBride B (eds) (2004) RDF/XML Syntax Specification. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Beckett D, Berners-Lee T (2008) Turtle — Terse RDF Triple Language. W3C Team Submission. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/turtle/. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Motik B, Parsia B, Patel-Schneider PF (eds), Bechhofer S, Grau BC, Fokoue A, Hoekstra R (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. XML Serialization. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owl-xml-serialization/. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Horridge M, Patel-Schneider PF (2009) OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Manchester Syntax. W3C Working Group Note. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/2009/NOTE-owl2-manchestersyntax-20091027/. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    W3C OWL Working Group (eds) (2009) Syntaxes. In: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Document Overview. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/#Syntaxes. Accessed 28 October 2010Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Dean M, Schreiber G (eds), Bechhofer S, van Harmelen F, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2004) Properties. In: OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium. www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Property. Accessed 30 October 2010Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Kokkelink S, Schwänzl R (2002) DC in collaboration with other vocabularies and DumbDown. In: Expressing Qualified Dublin Core in RDF / XML. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-rdf-xml/#sec3. Accessed 02 November 2010Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Barker P, Campbell LM, Roberts A, Smythe C (eds) (2006) IMS Meta-data Best Practice Guide for IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 Standard for Learning Object Metadata. Final Specification. IMS Global Learning Consortium. www.imsglobal.org/metadata/mdv1p3/imsmd_bestv1p3.html. Accessed 23 October 2010Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Iannella R (ed) (2002) ODRL 1.1 Expression Language Schema. Open Digital Rights Language Initiative. http://odrl.net/1.1/ODRL-EX-11-DOC/index.html. Accessed 23 October 2010Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Rivera-Aguilera AB, Vega-López M, Pozo-Marrero A (2010) Metadata Application Profile: Integrating Different Metadata Schemes for Cataloguing the Digital Learning Materials Collections. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Adobe Systems Inc. (2010) Embedding XMP metadata in application files. In: XMP specification, Part 3 — Storage in files. www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/devnet/xmp/pdfs/XMPSpecificationPart3.pdf. Accessed 17 November 2010Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    Sikos LF (2011) Advanced (X)HTML5 metadata and semantics for Web 3.0 videos. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology 2011, 31(4):247–252; http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/djlit/article/viewFile/1105/434. Accessed 20 July 2011Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    Yahoo! Inc. (2009) SearchMonkey — Video. Yahoo! Developer Network. Inc. http://developer.search.yahoo.com/help/objects/video. Accessed 15 October 2010Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    Goel K, Guha RV, Hansson O (2009) Introducing Rich Snippets. Google Inc. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/05/introducing-rich-snippets.html. Accessed 21 October 2010Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Birbeck M (2009) Introduction to RDFa. A List Apart Magazine. www.alistapart.com/articles/introduction-to-rdfa. Accessed 09 September 2010Google Scholar
  169. 169.
    Goel K, Gupta P, Hansson O (2009) Help us make the web better: An update on Rich Snippets. Google Inc. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/10/help-us-make-web-better-update-onrich. html. Accessed 21 October 2010Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Google Webmaster Central (2010) People. About contact information. Google Inc. www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=146646. Accessed 10 November 2010Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Google (2010) Social Graph API. Google Code Labs. http://code.google.com/intl/hu/apis/socialgraph/. Accessed 11 November 2010Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Yahoo! Developer Network (2008) Monkey Finds Microformats and RDF. Yahoo! Inc. http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2008/12/monkey_finds_microformats_and_rdf/. Accessed 13 November 2010Google Scholar
  173. 173.
    Anderson E, DeBolt V, Featherstone D, Gunther L, Jacobs DR, Jensen-Inman L, Mills C, Schmitt C, Sims G, Walter A (2010) Web writing that works (or doesn’t). In: InterACT With Web Standards — A Holistic Approach to Web Design. New Riders, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Leslie F. Sikos, Ph.D. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leslie F. Sikos

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations