🏷 adar ambiguity audience chi deceipt hci lying paper performativity phd social science tan teevan
paper (8 out of 8)
- Annotations must be shared in a community.
- Annotations can be reviewed and edited (/audited) (by group)
- Collaborative
- Central repo.
- Annotations contain semantic metadata.
- Content of resource annotated, not URL.
- Communication layer that doesn't interrupt annotation (uses external services).
- Annotea [9] [13]
-
- _J. Kahan, M.R. Koivunen, E. Prud Hommeaux, R.R. Swick. Annotea: an open _RDF infrastructure for shared Web annotations. Computer Networks. 2002.
- __
- _M Koivunen. Annotea and Semantic Web Supported Collaboration. Proc. Of ___
- the ESWC2005 Conference, 2005.
- No communication layer (but has discussion threads, wat?).
- Can only be edited by author, but can be reviewed by others.
- Can be local, private or shared. RDF.
-
- Piggy Bank [10]
-
- _D Huynh, S Mazzocchi, D Karger. Piggy Bank: Experience the Semantic Web _Inside Your Web Browser. Springer-Verlag GmbH. 2005.
- RDF.
- Auto and manual. Bundled with scrapers; if they fail, manual. Only of one type.
- Share group or global, or save to local 'semantic bank' <\\\\-- find="" is="" out="" this="" what="">
- Reviewed by all, edited by author.
- Community of users, but no SNS integration.
-
- KIM [14]
-
- A Kiryakov, B Popov, D Ognyanoff, D Manov, A Kirilov, M Goranov. Semantic Annotation, Indexing and Retrieval. Journal of Web Semantics, Springer. 2004.
- Automatic named entity recognition.
- Links to knowledgebase with ontology.
- Creates new URIs for new entities or link swith entities it already knows about.
- Global sharing.
- Can be deleted but not edited.
- No social involvement.
-
- Magpie [11]
-
- _J Domingue, M Dzbor and E Motta. Semantic Layering with Magpie. _Handbook on Ontologies. 2004.
- Auto annotate webpage.
- Similar to KIM, but does not hyperlink to knowledgebase; instead each item gets context menu (right click) with services depending on entity.
- 'Multi-dimensional approach'. Uses ontology to trigger other services depending on concept.
- Plugin for IE.
- Simply looks for entities that are in ontology (Dzbor 2004).
-
- creating tools
- creating principles and guidelines
- extending Web infrastructure re: information sharing and address privacy and user expectations of data use.
- [3] T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, O. Lassila, The semantic web, Scientific American (May 2001) 28–37.
- [10] J. Hendler, Web 3.0 emerging, IEEE Computer 42 (1) (January 2009).
- [11] I. Jacobs, N. Walsh (Eds.), Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One, 2004, W3C Recommendation 15 December 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-webarch-20041215/.
- trustworthiness
- reliability
- expectations about use of information
- privacy
- copyright
- (etc)
- Communities of practice
- Social networks, eg. FOAF
- Shared goal / interest / need
- Repeated active participation, emotional ties and shared activities.
- Shared resources and access policies
- Information, support and services reciprocated between members ( overlap with ^ ?)
- Shared context (culture, language)
- Can be applied to virtual and offline communities.
- Social interaction
- Shared purpose
- Common set of expected behaviours
- Computer system that facilitates and mediates communication
- Accessible via browser
- Explicit links between users
- System supports creation of these links
- Links are visible and browseable
- "better integration of distributed systems"
- "improved searching and filtering"
- "more personalised services"
- experienced users
- expand options
- new ways to interact
- new users
- ease introduction re: unwritten rules, expectations, terminologies
- experienced users
- CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (museums)
- ABC Ontology (multimedia in libraries and digital archives)
- Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (attribute and relationshops for task performed when consulting bibliographic records)
- FictionFinder - FRBR to Online Computer Library Centre
- WorldCat db - Metadata about characters and fictional places
- Describe contents of films & comics etc for tracking things down to share you forgot?
- Core
- Expression (primarily elements and subclasses; Entity, Event)
- Media (binding between media and Expression objects)
- Space (extension of Signage Location Ontology, buildings, and regions of structures)
- Extensions (more detailed subclasses to Core)
- Being (people)
- Trait (attributes of Entities)
- Events (extends Core->Event)
- Action
- Gain
- Loss
- Travel
- & properties thereof
- Fiction
- Character (on Being)
- spoiler info. and accuracy
- Media
- More detailed than the one in Core; includes audio, image, photo, text and video subclasses
- Misc - classes used by any or all of other classes, eg. colour, geometry
- Uses the online fiction community; suggests they could benefit from:
- improved searching
- improved meta data
- automatic recommendations
- trust webs
- personalisation.
- A HCI project, so usability tests and comparisons with current systems are key.
- Community centered design
- to determine user needs - through continual interactions and user studies.
- to consider how reader-facing apps present themselves and particular community
- responsibility of being a portal - need clear affordences and points of failure.
- Trust and Semantic Communities
- The semantic web “provides a common framework that allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise, and community boundaries.⁂ - Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Ora Lassila. The semantic web. Scientic American, May 2001.
- Do we trust:
- metadata
- data
- mechanism by which data is returned
- person requesting data?
- Many definitions of trust.
- Jennifer Golbeck's trust onotology to go with FOAF (Jennifer Golbeck, Bijan Parsia, and James Hendler. Trust networks on the semantic web. In Proceedings of Cooperative Intelligent Agents 2003, 2003.): ratings of 1 - 9 for trust of associates. Extended for FicNet (this paper)
- Here, trust: "the expectations that arise that an individual will not act in a way that is detrimental to another individual or community."
- I might need to expand that for my stuff... maybe... maybe this will do.
- Community predates the Internet. (duh)
- Necessary to get opinions from people outside of the amateur writing community, because it is broad. Such as parents/guardians of members.
- Questionnaire
- General information
- Reading habits
- Community involvement
- Access and distribution of materials
- Questionnaire distributed by:
- requests to archives to pass on to members
- LiveJournal
- emails to specific interested parties
- mailing lists / bulletin boards of relevant special interest groups.
- In two weeks, 1116 responses, from 30 countries.
- Used to inform ontology design for FicNet, and OntoMedia.
- Extension of FOAF, tailored for needs of online readers and writers.
- foaf:person -> fop:persona
- Separates environments for on and offline
- fop:NomDe - context for name
- Illusion of anonymity is fundamental to fanfic community (who are a large part of online amateur writers)
- Most authors have one or more pseudonyms.
- 80% said email address is the most personal information they should be asked for. ('of the 80%, 15% said no personal information should be requested from anyone - does this make sense? Do they mean other than email address? but that's the 80... If they're in the 80, they can't be part of that 15...)
- Privacy is the main thing holding back FOAF (Joseph Smarr. Technical and privacy challenges for integrating foaf into existing applications. Presented at 1st Workshop on Friend of a Friend, Social Networking and the Semantic Web, September 2004.)
- Personas aren't meaningless, because people become very attached to them, and only create new ones for specific reasons (says who? No citation..)
- Expands foaf:document and foaf:groups
- Creation, exchange and review of works is the point of these communities.
- FOP dismisses FOAF info like work and school as irrelevant or potentially dangerous.
- [Me] I think the on/offline divide won't be so extreme for many amateur film makers (another story for consumers) because often their faces are in their movies... Also anecdotal evidence from my own experiences that I'm open to having proven to be a minority. Actors vs characters is an interesting distinction too. One amateur film maker can have many personas, even across one channel of output.
- Options for FOP determined through long term study of metadata commonly attached to works. (Something I can do, too).
- FilmTrust by Golbeck (just joined, it was closed last time I looked).
- Could be prettier... but 2169 members!
- Visualisations of the network - I need to get good at this.
- Reader has to trust info from author falls within a certain level of accuracy. In amateur writing, it is more acceptable to be over cautious than lenient. Differing standards of acceptable content.
- Less trust is lost if a story is underrated than overrated (resulting in disappointment)
- A minority mislabeling work has a big effect on reputation of an archive/community (_HelpingHands community members. A place to pitch in and help - a website _creation resource and project. LiveJournal Community, 2005.)
- Writer has to trust reader to make the right decision.
-
FicNet has a more specialised trust system than Golbeck's.
- Largest contention in this field is adult material and younger readers (debated because this contrasts with IRL - no restricted areas in book stores, or suitability rating scheme for books).
- Initially focussed on age.
- Personas could vouch for each other. Creating fake personae to validate another wasn't worth payoff? Non malicious statements of distrust?
- How to integrate trust and distrust webs? Future
- Ontologies developed, ready to be used by applications!
- Ontologies will be continually refined.
- Now designing applications.
- Using info already gathered via quesitonnaire, re: UI, functionality.
- Integrate with OntoMedia to describe works, and link works with people.
Notes about Meervisage - A Community Based Annotation Tool (for the Semantic Web)
Rowe, M. (2007) Meervisage - A Community Based Annotation Tool. ‘Towards a Social Science of Web 2.0’ Conference at the University of York 5-6th September, 2007.
How SW can benefit from incorporation with existing 'Social Web'.
"...collaborative generation of metadata... using social networks as a user base..."
Uses fb groups created for sharing and organisation of research. Suggests posting links to useful resources is comparable to annotating the resource. Comments are more metadata.
Points out usual stuff of actually generating semantic data being a problem for SW.
System requirements:
Review of existing systems:
[1] Using existing information to derive semantics from folksonomies
(delicious):
_X Wu, L Zhang, Y Yu. Exploring social annotations for the Semantic Web.
_Proceedings of the 15th international conference on the World Wide Web,
2006.
[15] Social bookmarking tools and how semantic info aids resource discovery. Probabalistic model of how resources are annotated:
_A Plangprasopchok, K Lerman. Exploiting Social Annotation for Automatic _Resource Discovery. Eprint arXiv, 2007.
[16] Distributed nature of folksonomies. Improve search mechanisms. Tags not great:
S Choy, A. Lui. Web Information Retrieval in Collaborative Tagging Systems. Proceedings of International Conference on Web Intelligence, 2006.
(vs.)[17] Rigid taxonomies not great:
_C Shirky. Ontology is Overrated: Categories, Links, and Tags. Clay Shirky’s _Writings About the Internet, 2005.
[18] Methodology for easier browsing of large scale social annotations:
Z Xu, Y Fu, J Mao, D Su. Towards the semantic web: Collaborative tag suggestions. Collaborative Web Tagging Workshop at WWW2006, 2006.
All use one annotation per resource, not annotation of content within, so only one lot of metadata about a page.
Meervisage
"To aid the process of collaborative annotation of web documents"
Allows sharing of annotations between subset of SNS users (eg. fb group).
Management of users and groups offloaded to third party.
Stored in central annotation store.
Annotations contain author, SNS, folksonomies and date. Made from content within.
Meerkat is "responsible for generating semantic metadata by annotating external web resources." Meervisage for management via social network.
Meerkat allows a user to edit another user's annotations if they are members of the same group on facebook.
Popularity rating of resources rises with fb discussion.
Meerkat informs browser users if they come across a resource that has been heavily discussed on fb, and by which group etc.
Meervisage also provides RSS feed.
Evaluate by comparing precision and recall metrics of annotations by one user in an allotted time, and those by a group.
-> Don't know how this helps to assess quality of annotations; maybe I'm dumb? Find out.
Limited to private, says it's like that's a good think :s
Oh, because public access would be "laborious and resource intensive".
Annotations rated on usefulness and weighted.
[20] Attempt to describe folksonomies as part of formal ontology. Meervisage doesn't; limited to users' viewpoint:
_S Angeletou, M Sabou, L Specia, E Motta. Bridging the Gap Between Folksonomies and the Semantic Web: An Experience Report. Workshop: Bridging the Gap between Semantic Web and Web 2.0, European Semantic Web Conference, _2007.
[9] + [13] are most similar. Have groups, but groups aren't already established networks.
Future work
Annotating multimedia.
Matching assigned tags with ontology terms mined from Web.
[19] Desktop app for annotating text with ontology:
A Chakravarthy, F Ciravegna, V Lanfranchi. AKTiveMedia: Cross-media Document Annotation and Enrichment. Poster Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Semantic Web Conference, 2006.
Last modified:
Notes about the Semantic Web and social machines
J. Hendler, T. Berners-Lee, From the Semantic Web to social machines: A research challenge for AI on the World Wide Web, Artificial Intelligence (2009), doi:10.1016/j.artint.2009.11.010
Powerful human interactions enabled by futuristic high-speed infrastructure.
Empower Web of people via coupling of AI, social computing and new technologies. "humanity in the loop".
Social machine: "...processes in which people do the creative work and the machine does the administration." (Weaving the Web, p172).
Struggling with social mechanisms to control predatory behaviour and threats to privacy.
-> Tech must be developed that allows user communities to construct / share / adapt social machines, so successful models evolve through trial, use and refinement.
Claims a new generation of Web Technologies needed to overcome barriers to this; cross-disciplinary approach needed.
"...a revolutionarily more powerful platform for the individual, enabled by realizing that the individual is also a member of a community" (/ies)
"architecture of the future Web must be designed to allow the virtually unlimited interaction of the Web of people" (vs. documents now)
Giant Global Graph - dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/215
SW deployment:
"disruptive potential" of SWt, "important paradigm shift"
"little work in understanding the impact of their new capability"
"the smaller we can make the individual steps of this transformation, the easier it will be to find humans who can be incentivized to perform those steps."
"need to develop mechanisms to enable [connections between people]"
Lack structure for formally computing qualities like:
"requires data structures... to treat social expectations and legal rules as first-class objects" ("declarative rule-based infrastructure that is appropriate for the Web").
"open and distributed nature of the Web requires that rule sets be linked together."Cross-context use, sometimes unanticipated.Inconsistency sure to arise. No logics that control contradiction have been shown to scale well.
New approaches to problem of specifying contexts (need).
SMs must be able to apply different policies based on context.
Work in ontologies must extend to allow user communities to identify bias and share different interpretations.
Current security models / mechanisms insufficient.
[1] - formal models for privacy: L. Backstrom, C. Dwork, J. Kleinberg, Wherefore art thou r3579x?: Anonymized social networks, hidden patterns, and structural steganography, in: Proceedings of the 16th International World Wide Web Conference, Banff, 2007, pp. 181–190.
Provenance important in determining trustworthiness.
[20] information accountability, legal and public policy: D. Weitzner, H. Abelson, T. Berners-Lee, J. Feigenbaum, J. Hendler, G. Sussman, Information accountability, Communications of the ACM (June 2008).
policy-rule-based languages.Reasoners that can interpret policy and determine which uses of data are policy-compliant.-> How to tackle scaling?
RespectMyPrivacy dig.csail.mit.edu/2009/SocialWebPrivacy
[4] Lit review: T. Berners-Lee, W. Hall, J. Hendler, K. O’Hara, N. Shadbolt, D. Weitzner, A framework for web science, Foundations and Trends in Web Science 1 (1) (2006).
Last modified:
Notes on SW and Communities
Lawrence, K.F., schraefel, m.c.: Bringing communities to the semantic web and the semantic
web to communities. In: Proceedings of WWW2006. (2006)
Research into SW communities:
Compare with other definitions of communities outside of SW.
Concept: Internet Based Community Network, has properties of COP and SN.
Case study: Amateur Fiction Online.
Early community definitions, Howard Rheingold: "..webs of personal relationships in cyberspace."
1996 CSCW Conference defined prototypical attributes of communities (Whittacker):
-> More attributes = clearer example of community.
Preece:
^^ Things in common. Whittacker's is more inclusive/broad.
So for a SW SN:
COP or SN may describe a community, not necessarily. IBCN will do, and could be a COP or SN too.
Problem of Amateur Fic. is fluctuation of archive. Personal sites go down etc. How to find a story you remember a bit of?
IBCN is also combination of WBSN and virtual community.
Lack of incentive to use FOAF (eg. on LiveJournal etc) (Plus ignorance).
Doesn't offer anything they don't already have.
They don't use much metadata, just tons of human-readable stuff.
SW would allow:
FOP extension to FOAF for anonymous identities.
('Fan Online Persona' - why not just 'Online Persona'?)
Consistency likely in community-based system because of advantages of
reputation etc. Identity cost.
Shared set of behaviour values, or risk losing rep.
Reputation gained by taking part. (definitive part of community).
Additionally by creating works.
foaf:document and foaf:groups allow users to give details about their own creations and review work of others.
OntoMedia to describe content complements FOP.
Options in FOP gathered from study of metadata of works in mailing lists,
websites and groups.
Recommender system -> notification system.
Allow SNS of writers to be studied at friend level and collaboration level.
Application to allow users to create FOP under development...
Last modified:
Notes about Annotating Multimedia with OntoMediaLawrence, K.F., schraefel, m.c.: Bringing communities to the semantic web and the semantic web to communities. In: Proceedings of WWW2006. (2006)
Michael O. Jewell, K. Faith Lawrence, Adam Prugel-Bennett, and m. c. schraefel (200?) Annotation of Multimedia Using OntoMedia
Check out a bit of discussion about this paper on Ontologies with a View.
OntoMedia for representing "diverse range of media".
Others for media:
None quite did what was needed.
So created to map to current models but specifically describe media content.
Hierarchical approach.
1\\\\. Overview
Entity / Event system
Entity: object, concept
Event: interaction between one or more entities
0 or more Entities are modified OR new Entity created
Entities not destroyed, but may have not-exists attribute
Decompose to sub-ontologies.
ontomedia.ecs.soton.ac.uk/ontologies
Mediate? Graphical interface. interaction.ecs.soton.ac.uk/ir/projects/ontomedia/ontomedia
Sub-ontologies
Specified in OWL
Developed in Protege and SWOOP.
2\\\\. Case Study
Scene from Total Recall annotated. Represent script and characters, and
characters from related book, and links between two forms.
Screenplay annotation - SiX - Screenplays in XML.
Wraps around existing content.
Transition (cuts, fades, blackouts), location, dialogue and direction (action
taking place in the script)
SiX allows for DC, for creators, date, descr, title.
Custom XSL to conform marked up scripts to Oscar requirements for readability.
Script Item extends Media Item to link script representation to OntoMedia.
Use has-expression to tie to OntoMedia:Expression.
Describing places and access etc, like lift, like IF.
\\\\- For describing character continuity, eg 'can character really see x' etc.
Must describe events that don't occur. Characters want to occur, etc. Multiple timelines, dreams.
Declare events.
Create timeline and add occurances.
\\\\- events can be reused, and coincide.
3\\\\. Testing / querying
Imported into Sesame triplestore.
RDQL queries (subset of SPARQL, simpler, only ever has 1 graph pattern,
doesn't use RDF data typing)
4\\\\. Conclusion
No examples of pictures - how to annotate comics?
Combining OM with other apps.
Stuff integrated into Mediate.
Last modified:
Notes about Semantic Web tools for online communities
K. Faith Lawrence & Dr. Monica Schrafel (2007) Amateur Fiction Online - The Web of Community Trust: **A Case Study in Community Focused Design for the Semantic Web. Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia (IAM) Group, School of Electronics and Computer Science, **University of Southampton.
NB. Need to read her full thesis, of the same name. Will probably clear up some of the questions I scribbled whilst reading the paper.
Finding out if Semantic Web tools can be brought to hobbyist groups on the Web.
Related work
Case study
Fan Online Persona (FOP)
Trust
=> How did they get to talk to the parents of younger users? Did they ask the members to put them in touch? That doesn't seem like a realistic expectation to have, to me..
Last modified: