1. SKOS

2. Ontologies Metadata –Resources marked-up with descriptions of their content. No good unless everyone speaks the same language; Terminologies –Provide shared and common vocabularies of a domain, so search engines, agents, authors and users can communicate. No good unless everyone means the same thing; Ontologies –Provide a shared and common understanding of a domain that can be communicated across people and applications, and will play a major role in supporting information exchange and discovery.

3. Ontology A representation of the shared background knowledge for a community Providing the intended meaning of a formal vocabulary used to describe a certain conceptualisation of objects in a domain of interest A vocabulary of terms plus explicit characterisations of the assumptions made in interpreting those terms Nearly always includes some notion of hierarchical classification (is-a) Richer languages allow the definition of classes through description of their characteristics

4. A Spectrum of Representation Catalogue Terms/ glossary Thesauri Informal is-a Formal is-a Frames Value Restrictions Expressive Logics

5. SKOS SKOS: Simple Knowledge Organisation Scheme Used to represent term lists, controlled vocabularies and thesauri Lexical labelling Simple broader/narrower hierarchies (with no formal semantics) W3C Recommendation track, Candidate Rec (almost)

6. W3C Document Process Working Drafts Candidate Recommendation Proposed Recommendation Recommendation Last Call. The WG believe that requirements and dependencies are satisfied. Others should now review the documents. Review of >= 3 weeks Call for Implementations. WG believe that technology is stable and appropriate for implementation Call for Review of Proposed Recommendation. Demonstrations of implementations. Review of >= 4 weeks WG Note Published by a Working Group. Less stringent review process. A WG Note has no endorsement by W3C. May involve several drafts and internal review. We Are Here!

7. SKOS Goals to provide a simple, machine-understandable, representation framework for Knowledge Organisation Systems (KOS) … that has the flexibility and extensibility to cope with the variation found in KOS idioms … that is fully capable of supporting the publication and use of KOS within a decentralised, distributed, information environment such as the world wide (semantic) web.

8. SKOS A model for expressing basic structure of “concept schemes” Thesauri, classification schemes, taxonomies and other controlled vocabularies –Many of these already exist and are in use in cultural heritage, library sciences, medicine etc. SKOS aims to provide an RDF vocabulary for the representation of such schemes.

9. Concept Schemes A concept scheme is a set of concepts, potentially including statements about relationships between those concepts –Semantic Relationships Broader/Narrower Terms Related Terms –Lexical Labels Preferred, alternative and hidden labels –Additional documentation Notes, comments, descriptions Concept schemes aren’t formal ontologies in the way that, e.g. OWL ontologies are formal ontologies.

10. SKOS Example

11. Retrieval Scenarios A.Single controlled vocabulary used to index and then retrieve objects B.Different controlled vocabularies used to index and retrieve objects Mappings then required between the vocabularies Initial use cases/requirements focus on these tasks –Not worrying about activities like Natural Language translation, although this may be an interesting application of SKOS vocabs

12. SKOS and OWL SKOS itself is defined as an OWL ontology. –OWL Full in OWL 1.0 terms, ideally OWL 2.0 DL. A particular SKOS vocabulary is an instantiation of that ontology/schema SKOS labelling and documentation properties defined as OWL Annotation Properties –SKOS as a standardised vocabulary for annotating OWL ontologies Leverage existing tooling. –OWL API –Protégé

13. SKOS and OWL SKOS and OWL are intended for different purposes. OWL allows the explicit modelling/description of a domain SKOS provides vocabulary and navigational structure Interaction between representations is ongoing work. –Presenting OWL ontologies as SKOS vocabularies –Enriching SKOS vocabularies as OWL ontologies.

14. Mapping Concept Schemes SKOS also provides a collection of mapping properties that express relationships between concepts in different schemes –broadMatch/narrowMatch –closeMatch –exactMatch Support alignment of different concept schemes –Indiscriminate use of properties such as owl:sameAs can lead to undesirable consequences.

15. Protégé and Protégé-OWL The de facto standard ontology editor (100K+ registered users) Protégé-OWL, developed in Manchester, provides support for OWL and OWL 2 –~2,000 users on support lists Built on the OWL-API, an open source library for manipulation of OWL ontologies –20k+ downloads across all versions

16. Tooling: SKOSEd Editor supporting construction of SKOS vocabularies “Native” SKOS implementation –Protégé 4 plugin exploiting OWL definition of SKOS vocabulary –Reasoning support for classification Lexical labelling –Alternate language support Extension points for domain relationships

17. Tooling: SKOS API Java libraries supporting manipulation of SKOS vocabularies Follows philosophy of (and builds on) the OWL API –Insulating applications/users from the underlying concrete representations, e.g. RDF Provides internals of SKOSEd SKOS Convertors –OBO to SKOS Conversion

18. COHSE Vocabulary driven navigation around documents –Vocabulary not ontology! Simple text processing + vocabulary + open hypermedia architecture –Separating link and document –Explicit navigation around a domain vocabulary Current work –Extending text processing and named entity recognition –Linking to scientific workflows via myExperiment.