Correndo, Gianluca and Alani, Harith
(2007).
![[img]](http://oro.open.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png)
|
PDF (Accepted Manuscript)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (105Kb) |
| DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link: | http://doi.org/10.1109/WI-IATW.2007.35 |
|---|---|
| Google Scholar: | Look up in Google Scholar |
Abstract
The fast growth and spread of Web 2.0 environments have demonstrated the great willingness of general Web users to contribute and share various type of content and information. Many very successful web sites currently exist which thrive on the wisdom of the crowd, where web users in general are the sole data providers and curators. The Semantic Web calls for knowledge to be semantically represented using ontologies to allow for better access and sharing of data. However, constructing ontologies collaboratively is not well supported by most existing ontology and knowledge-base editing tools. This has resulted in the recent emergence of a new range of collaborative ontology construction tools with the aim of integrating some Web 2.0 features into the process of structured knowledge construction. This paper provides a survey of the start of the art of these tools, and highlights their significant features and capabilities.
| Item Type: | Conference Item |
|---|---|
| Copyright Holders: | 2007 The Authors |
| Keywords: | survey; collaborative tools; structured knowledge |
| Academic Unit/Department: | Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) > Knowledge Media Institute (KMi) Faculty of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) |
| Interdisciplinary Research Centre: | Centre for Research in Computing (CRC) |
| Item ID: | 20027 |
| Depositing User: | Harith Alani |
| Date Deposited: | 14 Apr 2010 11:12 |
| Last Modified: | 07 Aug 2016 03:22 |
| URI: | http://oro.open.ac.uk/id/eprint/20027 |
| Share this page: |     |
Altmetrics | Scopus Citations |
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.