Deploying a Semantically-Enabled Content Management System in a State University

  • Maria Befa
  • Efstratios Kontopoulos
  • Nick Bassiliades
  • Christos Berberidis
  • Ioannis Vlahavas
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6267)


Public institutes often face the challenge of managing vast volumes of administrative documents, a need that is often met via Content Management Systems (CMSs). CMSs offer various advantages, like separation of data structure from presentation and variety in user roles, but also present certain disadvantages, like inefficient keyword-based search facilities. The new generation of content management solutions imports the notion of semantics and is based on Semantic Web technologies, such as metadata and ontologies. The benefits include semantic interoperability, competitive advantages and dramatic cost reduction. In this paper a leading Enterprise CMS is extended with semantic capabilities for automatically importing and exporting ontologies. This functionality enables reuse of repository content, semantically-enabled search and interoperability with third-party applications. The extended system is deployed in semantically managing the large volumes of documents for a state university.


Semantic web metadata content management ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Auffret, M.: Content Management Makes Sense. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice 2 (December 2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Uren, V., Cimiano, P., Iria, J., Handschuh, S., Vargas-Vera, M., Motta, E., Ciravegna, F.: Semantic Annotation for Knowledge Management: Requirements and a Survey of the State of the Art. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 4(1), 14–28 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lytras, M., Garcia, R.: Semantic Web Applications: A Framework for Industry and Business Exploitation-What is needed for the Adoption of the Semantic Web from the Market and Industry. Int. Journal of Knowledge and Learning 4(1), 93–108 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American 284(5), 34–43 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guarino, N.: Formal Ontology, Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 43(5-6), 625–640 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brickley, D., Guha, R.V.: RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema (2004),
  7. 7.
    Fass, L.F.: The Semantic Web, E-Government and the Digital Divide. In: Abecker, A., Sheth, A., Mentzas, G., Stojanovic, L. (eds.) Semantic Web Meets eGovernment, Stanford University, pp. 14–17. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006); SS-06-06Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wagner, C., Cheung, K., Ip, R., Bottcher, S.: Building Semantic Webs for e-government with Wiki technology. Electronic Government 3(1), 36–55 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alfresco Enterprise Content Management System,
  10. 10.
    Wales, T.: Library Subject Guides: a Content Management Case Study at the Open University, UK. Program-Electronic Library and Information Systems 39(2), 112–121 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sheth, A., Bertram, C., Avant, D., Hammond, B., Kochut, K., Warke, Y.: Semantic Content Management for Enterprises and the Web. IEEE Internet Computing 6(4), 80–87 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aumueller, D., Rahm, E.: Caravela: Semantic Content Management with Automatic Information Integration and Categorization. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 729–738. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    García, R., Gimeno, J.M., Perdrix, F., Gil, R., Oliva, M.: The Rhizomer Semantic Content Management System. In: Lytras, M.D., Carroll, J.M., Damiani, E., Tennyson, R.D. (eds.) WSKS 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5288, pp. 385–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Amato, F., Mazzeo, A., Moscato, V., Picariello, A.: Semantic Management of Multimedia Documents for E-Government Activity. In: Int. Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems, pp. 1193–1198 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McBride, B.: Jena: Implementing the RDF Model and Syntax Specification. Technical report (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A Practical OWL-DL Reasoner. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the WWW 5(2), 51–53 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clark, A., Parker, C., Hanning, D., Convent, C., DeStefano, J., Stahl, J., Aspeli, M., Bowen, M., Newbery, R., Knox, S., McMahon, S., Conklin, T., Williams, V.: Practical Plone 3: A Beginner’s Guide to Building Powerful Websites. Packt Publishing (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Befa
    • 1
  • Efstratios Kontopoulos
    • 1
  • Nick Bassiliades
    • 1
  • Christos Berberidis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ioannis Vlahavas
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.School of Science & TechnologyInternational Hellenic UniversityThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations