DOCSLIB.ORG

Web Engineering for Semantic Web Applications

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Web Engineering for Semantic Web Applications WEESA ­ Web Engineering for Semantic Web Applications Gerald Reif Harald Gall Mehdi Jazayeri Distributed Systems Group Department of Informatics Distributed Systems Group Vienna University of University Zurich Vienna University of Technology Winterthurstrasse 190 Technology Argentinierstrasse 8 8057 Zurich, Switzerland Argentinierstrasse 8 1040 Vienna, Austria gall@ifi.unizh.ch 1040 Vienna, Austria [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT tation process. But still, the annotation process is a separate The success of the Semantic Web crucially depends on the task and is not integrated in the Web engineering process. existence of Web pages that provide machine-understandable Web Engineering focuses on the systematic and cost ef- meta-data. This meta-data is typically added in the seman- ficient development and evolution of Web applications [6]. tic annotation process which is currently not part of the Web The outcome of the Web Engineering process are Web ap- engineering process. Web engineering, however, proposes plications that provide Web pages that can be displayed in a methodologies to design, implement and maintain Web ap- Web browser but these applications lack semantic markup. plications but lack the generation of meta-data. In this pa- In this paper we show how existing XML-based Web en- per we introduce a technique to extend existing Web en- gineering methodologies can be extended to engineer se- gineering methodologies to develop semantically annotated mantically annotated Web pages. In the remainder of this Web pages. The novelty of this approach is the definition of paper we call Web applications that not only offer human- a mapping from XML Schema to ontologies, called WEESA, understandable content but also semantic meta-data Seman- that can be used to automatically generate RDF meta-data tic Web applications. from XML content documents. We further show how we in- The contribution of this paper is the conceptual defini- tegrated the WEESA mapping into an Apache Cocoon trans- tion and prototype implementation of a mapping from XML former to easily extend XML based Web applications to se- Schema to ontologies that allows the efficient design of Se- mantically annotated Web application. mantic Web applications based on existing Web engineering artifacts. The mapping can then be used to automatically generate RDF descriptions from XML content documents. Categories and Subject Descriptors We call this approach WEESA (WEb Engineering for Se- H.3.5 [Information Systems]: Information Storage and mantic web Applications). To our knowledge, WEESA is Retrieval; D.2 [Software]: Software Engineering the first approach that integrates semantic annotation in the Web engineering process. In this paper we show the integration of WEESA into an Apache Cocoon transformer General Terms [4] and the use of this transformer to develop Semantic Web Design applications. The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Sec- tion 2 briefly introduces semantic annotation. Section 3 in- Keywords troduces XML-based Web engineering. Section 4 explains Web Engineering, Semantic Web, Semantic Annotation, On- the idea of using an XML Schema { ontology mapping to tology generate RDF descriptions from XML documents. Section 5 shows the implementation, and Section 6 the integration of the mapping into a Cocoon transformer. Section 7 discusses 1. INTRODUCTION related work, Section 8 presents the case study and tool The existence of semantically annotated Web pages is cru- support, and Section 9 gives an outlook on future work and cial to bring the Semantic Web to life. But it is still costly concludes the paper. to develop and maintain Web applications that offer both: human-understandable information that can be displayed by a Web browser and machine-understandable meta-data that 2. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION can be processed by computers. The aim of semantic annotation is to transform documents Semantic annotation addresses this problem and aims to into machine-understandable artifacts by augmenting them turn human-understandable content into a machine-under- with meta-data that describes their meaning. In the Se- standable form by adding semantic markup [7]. Many tools mantic Web, this meta-data description is done using the have been developed that support the user during the anno- Resource Description Framework (RDF) that references the concepts defined in an ontology. Ontologies formally de- Copyright is held by the International World Wide Web Conference Com­ mittee (IW3C2). Distribution of these papers is limited to classroom use, fine concepts used in a domain and the relationship between and personal use by others. these concepts. An ontology is defined in an ontology defi- WWW 2005, May 10­14, 2005, Chiba, Japan. nition language such as RDFS, DAML+OIL, or OWL. ACM 1­59593­046­9/05/0005. 722 When adding semantic meta-data to documents, one faces WEESA mapping Design Level several problems [13]: XML Schema definition Ontology Annotating documents with Semantic markup is a time valid uses terms • consuming task and has to be performed in addition Instance Level generate to the authoring process. XML document RDF description The authors that annotate the documents are typically • generate not the ones who profit from the existence of meta- via XSLT included in the <head> tag data. This reduces the author's motivation to annotate HTML page Web pages. The granularity of the information found in the doc- • ument does not meet the needs of granularity in the Figure 1: Design and instance level ontology. Several information items that can be found in the document might be needed to compute the value that fits a property in the ontology. Based on this technology, editors responsible for the con- Looking at Web pages that provide RDF meta-data, so tent only have to know the structure of the XML file and • called Semantic Web pages, we recognize that impor- the allowed elements to prepare the content pages. Design- tant parts of the content are stored two times. First, ers, responsible for the layout of the Web application, again in HTML format that is displayed to the user via the only have to know the structure and elements of the XML Web browser, second in the RDF description. This re- file to write the XSLT stylesheets. Finally, programmers dundancy leads to inconsistency problems when main- responsible for the application logic have to generate XML taining the content of the Web page. Changes always documents (or fragments) as output. An XML Schema de- have to be done consistently for both types of infor- fines exactly the structure and the allowed elements in an mation. XML file that is valid according to this schema. Therefore, XML Schema can be seen as a contract the editors, designers Many Web pages are not static documents but are gen- • and programmers have to agree on [9]. erated dynamically e.g. using a database. Annotating Since XML is widely used in Web engineering, our ap- dynamic documents leads to performing the same task proach to engineer Semantic Web applications uses the XML over and over for a specific pattern of documents. content to generate the RDF meta-data description from a Web page. We also use the XML Schema as a contract and Several annotation tools have been proposed to overcome map the elements defined in the schema to concepts defined the problems listed above. Early tools such as the SHOE in an ontology. Our goal is to use the structure and the Knowledge Annotator [8] mainly concentrated on avoiding content of the XML document to fill the RDF triples with syntactic mistakes and typos when referencing ontologies. data. Current tools such a CREAM/OntoMat [7] are sophisticated In the proposed approach, the XML document is the basis authoring frameworks that support the user while writing for the HTML page as well as for the RDF description. This and annotating the document and help maintaining the gen- helps to overcome the inconsistency problem pointed out in erated meta-data. Still, the annotation process is not inte- the Section before. grated in the engineering process of a Web application as proposed by the Web engineering community. 4. MAPPING XML SCHEMA TO 3. XML­BASED WEB PUBLISHING ONTOLOGIES Web Engineering focuses on the systematic and cost ef- In our WEESA mapping we use the content of an XML ficient design, development, maintenance, and evolution of document to derive its RDF meta-data description. In the Web applications [6]. Most Web engineering methodologies design phase of the Web application, however, we have no are based on separation-of-concerns to define strict roles in XML documents at hand. But we have the XML Schema the development process and to enable parallel development definition that provides us with information about the struc- [9]. The most frequently used concerns are the content, the ture of valid XML documents. We use this information to graphical appearance, and the application logic. When we define a mapping from XML elements to concepts used in plan to design Web applications that in addition offer se- an ontology. Figure 1 shows the definition of the WEESA mantic markup we have to introduce a new concern, the mapping on the design level and how this mapping is used meta-data concern. at instance level to automatically generate RDF meta-data Most Web engineering methodologies use XML and XSLT from XML documents. for strict separation of content and graphical appearance. In Section 2 we introduced the granularity problem when XML focuses only on the structure of the content, whereas annotating documents. We face the same problems when XSLT is a powerful transformation language to translate defining the WEESA mapping. It is possible that the con- an XML input document into an output document such cept of an XML element/attribute can be mapped one-to- as again an XML document, HTML, or even plain text.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • V a Lida T in G R D F Da
    Series ISSN: 2160-4711 LABRA GAYO • ET AL GAYO LABRA Series Editors: Ying Ding, Indiana University Paul Groth, Elsevier Labs Validating RDF Data Jose Emilio Labra Gayo, University of Oviedo Eric Prud’hommeaux, W3C/MIT and Micelio Iovka Boneva, University of Lille Dimitris Kontokostas, University of Leipzig VALIDATING RDF DATA This book describes two technologies for RDF validation: Shape Expressions (ShEx) and Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL), the rationales for their designs, a comparison of the two, and some example applications. RDF and Linked Data have broad applicability across many fields, from aircraft manufacturing to zoology. Requirements for detecting bad data differ across communities, fields, and tasks, but nearly all involve some form of data validation. This book introduces data validation and describes its practical use in day-to-day data exchange. The Semantic Web offers a bold, new take on how to organize, distribute, index, and share data. Using Web addresses (URIs) as identifiers for data elements enables the construction of distributed databases on a global scale. Like the Web, the Semantic Web is heralded as an information revolution, and also like the Web, it is encumbered by data quality issues. The quality of Semantic Web data is compromised by the lack of resources for data curation, for maintenance, and for developing globally applicable data models. At the enterprise scale, these problems have conventional solutions. Master data management provides an enterprise-wide vocabulary, while constraint languages capture and enforce data structures. Filling a need long recognized by Semantic Web users, shapes languages provide models and vocabularies for expressing such structural constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of Erik Wilde
    dretbiblio dretbiblio Erik Wilde's Bibliography References [1] AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, San Francisco, California, December 1968. [2] Seventeenth IEEE Conference on Computer Communication Networks, Washington, D.C., 1978. [3] ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, Los Angeles, Cal- ifornia, March 1982. ACM Press. [4] First Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 1986. [5] 1987 ACM Conference on Hypertext, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, November 1987. ACM Press. [6] 18th IEEE International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Tokyo, Japan, 1988. IEEE Computer Society Press. [7] Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, Oregon, 1988. ACM Press. [8] Conference on Office Information Systems, Palo Alto, California, March 1988. [9] 1989 ACM Conference on Hypertext, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, November 1989. ACM Press. [10] UNIX | The Legend Evolves. Summer 1990 UKUUG Conference, Buntingford, UK, 1990. UKUUG. [11] Fourth ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Hilton Head, South Carolina, November 1991. [12] GLOBECOM'91 Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, 1991. IEEE Computer Society Press. [13] IEEE INFOCOM '91 Conference on Computer Communications, Bal Harbour, Florida, 1991. IEEE Computer Society Press. [14] IEEE International Conference on Communications, Denver, Colorado, June 1991. [15] International Workshop on CSCW, Berlin, Germany, April 1991. [16] Third ACM Conference on Hypertext, San Antonio, Texas, December 1991. ACM Press. [17] 11th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, Houston, Texas, 1992. IEEE Computer Society Press. [18] 3rd Joint European Networking Conference, Innsbruck, Austria, May 1992. [19] Fourth ACM Conference on Hypertext, Milano, Italy, November 1992. ACM Press. [20] GLOBECOM'92 Conference, Orlando, Florida, December 1992. IEEE Computer Society Press. http://github.com/dret/biblio (August 29, 2018) 1 dretbiblio [21] IEEE INFOCOM '92 Conference on Computer Communications, Florence, Italy, 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • XML Prague 2020
    XML Prague 2020 Conference Proceedings University of Economics, Prague Prague, Czech Republic February 13–15, 2020 XML Prague 2020 – Conference Proceedings Copyright © 2020 Jiří Kosek ISBN 978-80-906259-8-3 (pdf) ISBN 978-80-906259-9-0 (ePub) Table of Contents General Information ..................................................................................................... vii Sponsors .......................................................................................................................... ix Preface .............................................................................................................................. xi A note on Editor performance – Stef Busking and Martin Middel .............................. 1 XSLWeb: XSLT- and XQuery-only pipelines for the web – Maarten Kroon and Pieter Masereeuw ............................................................................ 19 Things We Lost in the Fire – Geert Bormans and Ari Nordström .............................. 31 Sequence alignment in XSLT 3.0 – David J. Birnbaum .............................................. 45 Powerful patterns with XSLT 3.0 hidden improvements – Abel Braaksma ............ 67 A Proposal for XSLT 4.0 – Michael Kay ..................................................................... 109 (Re)presentation in XForms – Steven Pemberton and Alain Couthures ................... 139 Greenfox – a schema language for validating file systems – Hans-Juergen Rennau ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pearls of XSLT/Xpath 3.0 Design
    PEARLS OF XSLT AND XPATH 3.0 DESIGN PREFACE XSLT 3.0 and XPath 3.0 contain a lot of powerful and exciting new capabilities. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the new capabilities. Have you got a pearl that you would like to share? Please send me an email and I will add it to this paper (and credit you). I ask three things: 1. The pearl highlights a capability that is new to XSLT 3.0 or XPath 3.0. 2. Provide a short, complete, working stylesheet with a sample input document. 3. Provide a brief description of the code. This is an evolving paper. As new pearls are found, they will be added. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. XPath 3.0 is a composable language 2. Higher-order functions 3. Partial functions 4. Function composition 5. Recursion with anonymous functions 6. Closures 7. Binary search trees 8. -- next pearl is? -- CHAPTER 1: XPATH 3.0 IS A COMPOSABLE LANGUAGE The XPath 3.0 specification says this: XPath 3.0 is a composable language What does that mean? It means that every operator and language construct allows any XPath expression to appear as its operand (subject only to operator precedence and data typing constraints). For example, take this expression: 3 + ____ The plus (+) operator has a left-operand, 3. What can the right-operand be? Answer: any XPath expression! Let's use the max() function as the right-operand: 3 + max(___) Now, what can the argument to the max() function be? Answer: any XPath expression! Let's use a for- loop as its argument: 3 + max(for $i in 1 to 10 return ___) Now, what can the return value of the for-loop be? Answer: any XPath expression! Let's use an if- statement: 3 + max(for $i in 1 to 10 return (if ($i gt 5) then ___ else ___))) And so forth.
    [Show full text]
  • High Performance XML Data Retrieval
    High Performance XML Data Retrieval Mark V. Scardina Jinyu Wang Group Product Manager & XML Evangelist Senior Product Manager Oracle Corporation Oracle Corporation Agenda y Why XPath for Data Retrieval? y Current XML Data Retrieval Strategies and Issues y High Performance XPath Requirements y Design of Extractor for XPath y Extractor Use Cases Why XPath for Data Retrieval? y W3C Standard for XML Document Navigation since 2001 y Support for XML Schema Data Types in 2.0 y Support for Functions and Operators in 2.0 y Underlies XSLT, XQuery, DOM, XForms, XPointer Current Standards-based Data Retrieval Strategies y Document Object Model (DOM) Parsing y Simple API for XML Parsing (SAX) y Java API for XML Parsing (JAXP) y Streaming API for XML Parsing (StAX) Data Retrieval Using DOM Parsing y Advantages – Dynamic random access to entire document – Supports XPath 1.0 y Disadvantages – DOM In-memory footprint up to 10x doc size – No planned support for XPath 2.0 – Redundant node traversals for multiple XPaths DOM-based XPath Data Retrieval A 1 1 2 2 1 /A/B/C 2 /A/B/C/D B F B 1 2 E C C 2 F D Data Retrieval using SAX/StAX Parsing y Advantages – Stream-based processing for managed memory – Broadcast events for multicasting (SAX) – Pull parsing model for ease of programming and control (StAX) y Disadvantages – No maintenance of hierarchical structure – No XPath Support either 1.0 or 2.0 High Performance Requirements y Retrieve XML data with managed memory resources y Support for documents of all sizes y Handle multiple XPaths with minimum node traversals
    [Show full text]
  • Decentralized Identifier WG F2F Sessions
    Decentralized Identifier WG F2F Sessions Day 1: January 29, 2020 Chairs: Brent Zundel, Dan Burnett Location: Microsoft Schiphol 1 Welcome! ● Logistics ● W3C WG IPR Policy ● Agenda ● IRC and Scribes ● Introductions & Dinner 2 Logistics ● Location: “Spaces”, 6th floor of Microsoft Schiphol ● WiFi: SSID Publiek_theOutlook, pwd Hello2020 ● Dial-in information: +1-617-324-0000, Meeting ID ● Restrooms: End of the hall, turn right ● Meeting time: 8 am - 5 pm, Jan. 29-31 ● Breaks: 10:30-11 am, 12:30-1:30 pm, 2:30-3 pm ● DID WG Agenda: https://tinyurl.com/didwg-ams2020-agenda (HTML) ● Live slides: https://tinyurl.com/didwg-ams2020-slides (Google Slides) ● Dinner Details: See the “Dinner Tonight” slide at the end of each day 3 W3C WG IPR Policy ● This group abides by the W3C patent policy https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205 ● Only people and companies listed at https://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/117488/status are allowed to make substantive contributions to the specs ● Code of Conduct https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/ 4 Today’s agenda 8:00 Breakfast 8:30 Welcome, Introductions, and Logistics Chairs 9:00 Level setting Chairs 9:30 Security issues Brent 10:15 DID and IoT Sam Smith 10:45 Break 11:00 Multiple Encodings/Different Syntaxes: what might we want to support Markus 11:30 Different encodings: model incompatibilities Manu 12:00 Abstract data modeling options Dan Burnett 12:30 Lunch (brief “Why Are We Here?” presentation) Christopher Allen 13:30 DID Doc Extensibility via Registries Mike 14:00 DID Doc Extensibility via JSON-LD Manu
    [Show full text]
  • Automatic Generic Web Information Extraction at Scale
    1 Automatic Generic Web Information Extraction at Scale Master Thesis Computer Science, Data Science and Technology University of Twente. Enschede, The Netherlands An attempt to bring some structure to the web data mess. Author Mahmoud Aljabary Supervisors Dr. Ir. Maurice van Keulen Dr. Ir. Marten van Sinderen March 2021 2 Abstract The internet is growing at a rapid speed, as well as the need for extracting valuable information from the web. Web data is messy and disconnected, which poses a challenge for information extraction research. Current extraction methods are limited to a specific website schema, require manual work, and hard to scale. In this thesis, we propose a novel component-based design method to solve these challenges in a generic and automatic way. The global design consists of 1. a relevancy filter (binary classifier) to clean out irrelevant websites. 2. a feature extraction component to extract useful features from the relevant websites, including XPath. 3. an XPath-based clustering component to group similar web page elements into clusters based on Levenshtein distance. 4. a knowledge-based entity recognition component to link clusters with their corresponding entities. The last component remains for future work. Our experiments show huge potential in this generic approach to structure and extract web data at scale without the need for pre-defined website schemas. More work is needed in future experiments to link entities with their attributes and explore untapped candidate features. Keywords: Web information extraction, Machine learning, Web data wrapping, Wrapper induction, Relevancy filter, Clustering, Entity recognition, XPath, DOM, HTML, JSON, Levenshtein distance, Design science.
    [Show full text]
  • STYX: Connecting the XML Web to the World of Semantics
    STYX: Connecting the XML Web to the World of Semantics Irini Fundulaki1, Bernd Amann1, Catriel Beeri2, Michel Scholl1, and Anne-Marie Vercoustre3 1 Cedric-CNAM Paris, INRIA Rocquencourt [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 2 Hebrew University, Israel [email protected] 3 INRIA-Rocquencourt; currently on leave at CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences, Melbourne, Australia [email protected] 1 Introduction The STYX prototype illustrates a new way to publish and query XML resources on the Web. It has been developed as part of the C-Web (Community Web) project1 whose main objective is to support the sharing, integration and retrieval of information in Web communities concerning a specific domain of interest. STYX is based on a simple but nevertheless powerful model for publish- ing and querying XML resources [1]. It implements a set of Web-based tools for creating and exploiting semantic portals to XML Web resources. The main functions of such a portal can be summarized as follows: (i) XML resources can be published/unpublished on the fly; (ii) structured queries can be formulated by taking into consideration the conceptual representation of a specific domain in form of an ontology; (iii) query results can be customized for display and further exploitation. The backbone of a STYX portal is a domain specific ontology comprised of concepts and roles describing the basic notions in the domain. Our approach [1] takes advantage of the presence of XML Document Type Definitions (DTDs) that capture the structure of XML documents. An XML source is published in 2 a STYX portal by a set of mapping rules that map XML document fragments specified by XPath3 location paths to ontology paths.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation Component XSL Reference Rev: 2013-10-04
    Sitecore CMS 6.2 or later Presentation Component XSL Reference Rev: 2013-10-04 Sitecore CMS 6.2 or later Presentation Component XSL Reference A Conceptual Overview for Developers Sitecore® is a registered trademark. All other brand and product names are the property of their respective holders. The contents of this document are the property of Sitecore. Copyright © 2001-2013 Sitecore. All rights reserved. Sitecore CMS 6.2 or later Presentation Component XSL Reference Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2 Basic XSL and XPath Constructs .................................................................................... 5 2.1 XSL Overview .................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 XML, XSL, and XPath Tokens ............................................................................................ 7 2.3 XSL Elements .................................................................................................................... 9 2.3.1 The <xsl:variable> XSL Element ..................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 The <xsl:value-of> XSL Element ..................................................................................... 9 2.3.3 The <xsl:if> XSL Element ............................................................................................. 10 2.3.4 The <xsl:choose, <xsl:when>,
    [Show full text]
  • A Logic Based Approach for the Multimedia Data Representation and Retrieval
    A Logic Based Approach for the Multimedia Data Representation and Retrieval Samira Hammiche, Salima Benbernou Athena Vakali LIRIS – University Claude Bernard Lyon 1 Department of Informatics 43, bld du 11 Novembre 1918 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki 69622 Villeurbanne - France 54006 Thessaloniki – Greece {shammich, sbenbern}@liris.univ-lyon1.fr [email protected] Abstract The Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) published the standard MPEG-7 1, in February 2002 which aims to Nowadays, the amount of multimedia data is increasing describe the multimedia content from different viewpoints. rapidly, and hence, there is an increasing need for efficient This standard is based on XML Schema [2] and focuses on methods to manage the multimedia content. This paper pro- the structural and low-level features, then it is suitable for poses a framework for the description and retrieval of mul- the representation of the syntactic dimension of the multi- timedia data. The data are represented at both the syntactic media content. However, XML Schema displays some lim- (structure, metadata and low level features) and semantic itations when there is a need to extract implicit information. (the meaning of the data) levels. We use the MPEG-7 stan- This is due to the fact that there is neither formal semantics dard, which provides a set of tools to describe multimedia nor inference capabilities associated with the elements of an content from different viewpoints, to represent the syntactic XML document. Consequently, MPEG-7 cannot represent level. However, due to its XML Schema based represen- the meaning (semantics) of the multimedia content. Then, tation, MPEG-7 is not suitable to represent the semantic another formalism has to be considered for the semantic di- aspect of the data in a formal and concise way.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Specification and Verification of Web Systems
    PROCEEDINGS AUTOMATED SPECIFICATION AND VERIFICATION OF WEB SYSTEMS SIXTH INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP JULY 30-31, 2010 VIENNA,AUSTRIA LAURA KOVACS´ AND TEMUR KUTSIA (EDS.) Preface This report contains the pre-proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Automated Specifi- cation and Verification of Web Systems (WWV’10), held at Vienna University of Technology (Austria) on July 30-31, 2010. The previous editions of the WWV series took place in Hagenberg (2009), Siena (2008), Venice (2007), Paphos (2006), and Valencia (2005). WWV’10 provided a common forum for researchers from the communities of Rule-based program- ming, Automated Software Engineering, and Web-oriented research, in order to facilitate the cross- fertilization and the advancement of hybrid methods that combine the three areas. The Program Committee of WWV’10 collected three reviews for each paper and held an electronic discussion in May 2010 which has led to the selection of 5 regular papers. In addition to the selected papers, the scientific program included two invited talks by Thomas Eiter from Vienna University of Technology (Austria) and Andrei Voronkov from the University of Manchester (UK). We would like to thank them for having accepted our invitation. We would also like to thank all the members of the Program Committee and all the referees for their careful work in the review and selection process. Many thanks to all authors who submitted papers and to all conference participants. We thank Andrei Voronkov for his help on EasyChair. Finally, we gratefully acknowledge
    [Show full text]
  • XML London 2017 Proceedings
    XML LONDON 2017 CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON, LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM JUNE 10–11, 2017 XML London 2017 – Conference Proceedings Published by XML London Copyright © 2017 Charles Foster ISBN 978-0-9926471-4-8 Table of Contents General Information. 5 Sponsors. 6 Preface. 7 Distributing XSLT Processing between Client and Server - O'Neil Delpratt and Debbie Lockett. 8 Location trees enable XSD based tool development - Hans-Jürgen Rennau. 20 An Architecture for Unified Access to the Internet of Things - Jack Jansen and Steven Pemberton. 38 Migrating journals content using Ant - Mark Dunn and Shani Chachamu. 43 Improving validation of structured text - Jirka Kosek. 56 XSpec v0.5.0 - Sandro Cirulli. 68 Bridging the gap between knowledge modelling and technical documentation - Bert Willems. 74 DataDock: Using GitHub to Publish Linked Open Data - Khalil Ahmed. 81 Urban Legend or Best Practice: Teaching XSLT in The Age of Stack Overflow - Nic Gibson. 89 Intuitive web- based XML-editor Xeditor allows you to intuitively create complex and structured XML documents without any technical knowledge using a configurable online editor simi- lar to MSWord with real-time validation. www.xeditor.com General Information Date Saturday, June 10th, 2017 Sunday, June 11th, 2017 Location University College London, London – Roberts Engineering Building, Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7JE Organising Committee Charles Foster, Socionics Limited Dr. Stephen Foster, Socionics Limited Geert Bormans, C-Moria Ari Nordström, Creative Words Andrew Sales,
    [Show full text]