Advertisement

Knowledge Representation Standards

  • Witold Abramowicz
  • Paweł Kalczyński
  • Krzysztof Węcel

Abstract

Due to the fast growth of information volume, proper description of distributed information is essential for machine processing. Many proposals on the subject have recently emerged and some of them will be presented in this chapter.

Keywords

Unify Modeling Language Resource Description Framework Markup Language Object Management Group Uniform Resource Identifier 
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. Berners-Lee T, Fielding R, Irvine UC, Masinter L (1998) Uniform resource identifiers (URI): Generic syntax, RFC 2396, Aug 1998http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
  2. Bradley N (1997) The Concise Sgml Companion. Addison-Wesley, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Bray T (1998) RDF and Metadata. XML.Com, 9 June 1998,http://www.xm1.com/pub/98/06/rdfhtml
  4. Bray T, Guha RV (1997) An MCF Tutorial. http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-MCF-XML/MCFtutorial.html (2001-04-08)
  5. Bray T, Hollander D, Layman A (1999) Namespaces in XML. W3C Recommendation, 14 January 1999, http://www.w3.org/fR/1999/REC-xml-names-19990114
  6. CWM, The Data Warehousing. CWM and MOF Resource Pagehttp://www.omg.org/technology/cwin
  7. CWM-1 (2000) Common Warehouse Metamodel Specification. OMG Document, 11 Feb 2000, pp 424, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad00-01-01.pdf
  8. CWM-2 (2000) Common Warehouse Metamodel Specification, Volume 2. XML, IDL and DTD, OMG Document, pp 722, 11 Feb 2000http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad00-0102.pdf
  9. CWM-3 (2000) Common Warehouse Metamodel Specification, Volume 3. Extensions, OMG Document, pp 218, 11 Feb 2000, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad00-01-03.pdf
  10. CWM-4 (2000) Common Warehouse Metamodel (CWM) Specification, Volume 4. Extensions XML, IDL and DTD, OMG Document, pp 389, 11 Feb 2000, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad00-01-01.pdf
  11. CWMI-Cover, Robin Cover, OMG Common Warehouse Metadata Interchange (CWMI) Specification.http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/omg-cwmi.html
  12. CWMI-RFP (2000) Common Warehouse Metadata Interchange Request for Proposal, 2 Sep 2000, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/98-09-02.pdf
  13. DC,The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.http://dublincore.org
  14. DCES, Description of the Dublic Core Elements.http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/
  15. DCRDF, Guidance on expressing the Dublin Core within the Resource Description Framework (RDF) http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/resources/dc/datamodel/WD-do-rdf/
  16. D'Inverno M,Luck M(2001)Understanding Agent Systems. Springer-Verlag New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Dodds D, Watt A, Birbeck M, Cousins J, Ahmed K, Rivers-Moore D, et al. (2001) Professional XML Meta Data, Wrox PressGoogle Scholar
  18. DOM, Document Object Model Level 1 Specification. Apparao V, Byrne S, Champion M, Isaacs S, Jacobs I, Le Hors A, et al.(eds) W3C Recommendation 1 October, 1998, http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-DOM-Level-1
  19. Ensign C (1996) SGML: The Billion Dollar Secret. Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  20. Fensel D (2001) Ontologies: A Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  21. Goldfarb CF, Rubinsky Y (1991) The Sgml Handbook. Clarendon PrGoogle Scholar
  22. Guha RV (1996) Meta Content Framework: A Whitepaper.http://webl.guha.com/mcf.html(2001-04-08)
  23. Guha RV (1997a) Towards a Theory of Meta-content (last modified 10 April 1997).http://www.xspace.net/hotsauce/mc.html(2001-04-08)
  24. Guha RV, Bray T (1997b) Meta Content Framework using XML. (eds) June 6, 1997. http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-MCF-XML
  25. Iyengar S, Dirckze R, Baisley DE (2000) UML, MOF, and XMI. XML Journal, Vol.1, issue 3, http://www.sys-con.com/xml/archives/0103/sri_ravi_don/index.html(2001-05-07)
  26. Jelliffe R (1998) The XML and SGML Cookbook: Recipes for Structured Information (Charles F. Goldfarb Series). Prentice Hall PTRGoogle Scholar
  27. Ksiezyk R (1999) XML. Internet-based Solutions for Business Information. In: Abramowicz W, Orlowska M (eds) Proc of the 3rd International Conference on Business Information Systems BIS’99, Springer-Verlag London, pp 159-166Google Scholar
  28. Lagoze C (1996b) The Warwick Framework. A Container Architecture for Diverse Sets of Metadata. D-Lib Magazine, 7/1996, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july96/lagoze/071agoze.html
  29. Lagoze C, Lynch CA, Daniel R (1996a) The Warwick Framework: A Container Architecture for Aggregating Sets of Metadata. URN=ncstrl.cornell/TR96-1593, June 21, 1996,http://cs-tr.cs.cornell.edu/Dienst/UI/2.0/Describe/ncstrl.comell/TR96-1593
  30. Lasilla O (1997) Introduction to RDF Metadata. W3C Note, 13 November 1997,http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-rdf-simple-intro
  31. Layman A, Jung E, Maler E, Thompson HS, Paoli J, Tigue J, et al. (1998). XML-Data, W3C Note 05 Jan 1998http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-XML-data
  32. Maler E, Andaloussi JE (1995) Developing SGML DTDs: From Text to Model to Markup, Prentice Hall PTRGoogle Scholar
  33. Marco D (2000) Building and Managing the Meta Data Repository: A Full Lifecycle Guide. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  34. Marcotty M, Ledgard H (1986) The World of Programming Languages. Springer-Verlag BerlinGoogle Scholar
  35. Megginson D (1998) Structuring XML Documents. Prentice Hall PTRGoogle Scholar
  36. MetaW3C, Metadata Activity Statementhttp://www.w3.org/Metadata/Activity.html
  37. Miller E (1998) An Introduction to the Resource Description Framework, D-Lib Magazine, May 1998, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may98/miller/05miller.html
  38. Miller E (1999) Using Web Metadata: The Resource Description Framework, WWW-7 Tutorial Track, Brisbane, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  39. Musciano C, Kennedy B (2000) HTML & XHTML: The Definitive Guide, 4'hedition. O'Reilly & AssociatesGoogle Scholar
  40. Naur P (1960) Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language ALGOL 60. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 3 No 5, May 1960, pp 299-314MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. OCLC-NR1997 (1997) Dublin Core and Web MetaData Standards Converge in Helsinki. OCLC News Releases, Nov. 1997, http://www.ocic.org/ocic/press/971107a.htm
  42. PICS, The Platform for Content Selection. W3C, http://www.w3.org/PICS
  43. PICSNG, The Platform for Content Selection Next Generation. W3Chttp://www.w3.org/PICS/NG
  44. RDF, Resource Description Framework, Model and Syntax Specification. Lasilla O, Swick RR (eds) W3C Recommendation, 22 February 1999http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdfsyntax/f
  45. RDFS, Resource Description Framework Schema Specification 1.0. Brickley D, Guha RV (eds) W3C Candidate Recommendation, 27 March 2000http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CRrdf-schema-20000327
  46. Tannenbaum A (2001) Metadata Solutions: Using Metamodels, Repositories, XML, and Enterprise Portals to Generate Information on Demand. Addison WesleyGoogle Scholar
  47. TGN, Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names. http://shiva.pub.getty.edu/tgn_browser/
  48. Thompson HS, Beech D, Maloney M, Mendelsohn N (2000) XML Schema Part 1: Structures. W3C Recommendation 2 May 2001http://www.w3.org/TR/xmischema-1/
  49. Weibel SL, Dempsey L (1996) The Warwick Metadata Workshop: A Framework for the Deployment of Resource Description. D-Lib Magazine, July/August 1996, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july96/07weibel.html

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Witold Abramowicz
    • 1
  • Paweł Kalczyński
    • 1
  • Krzysztof Węcel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe Poznań University of EconomicsPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations