Semantic Web WS 2016/17

1. Semantic WebWS 2016/17 Social Semantic Web Anna Fensel 12.12.2016

2. Where are we?

3. Agenda • Motivation • From Web to Web 2.0: Technical solution and illustrations • Social Semantic Web : Technical solution and illustrations • Summary • References

4. MOTIVATION

5. Motivation 5

6. Motivation (cont‘d) • Information Sharing: • Image sharing: Flickr • Video sharing: YouTube • Online encyclopedia: Wikipedia • Blogs: eblogger • Open Source Community: Linux • File Management • Tagging: Delicious • Social Websites and Communication: • Facebook • LastFM • Skype • StudiVZ • LinkedIn, Xing • Open Systems: APIs, partly open source allow extensions by users

7. Social Network Facebook • Facebook is a social networking service and website; • Launched in February 2004 • It is owned and operated by Facebook, Inc. • 1.49 billion monthly active users as of June 30, 2015 * • 1.31 billion mobile monthly active users as of June 30, 2015 * • Users must register before using the services. • Users can create a personal profile, add friends, exchange messages, chat (the company has also launched a separate instant messaging service), receive automatic notifications, take part in games, etc. * http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

8. Motivation (cont‘d) Wikipedia Free Online Encyclopedia • 3,197,507 Articles (english Wikipedia)‏ • 11,693,499 registered contributors • Clever mechanisms combined with human intelligence • High quality articles • Self-organized control • Semi-openess http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Statistics, 17.2.2010

9. FROM WEB TO WEB 2.0: TECHNICAL SOLUTION AND ILLUSTRATIONS

10. Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 • Evolution • Definition • Applications and success stories • Statistics to Web 2.0

11. Web 2.0 “Web 2.0 is a notion for a row of interactive and collaborative systems of the internet“ http://widgets-gadgets.com/2006_10_01_archive.html

12. What is the web 2.0? „Definition“ by O‘Reilly Web 1.0 Web 2.0 improvement DoubleClick Google AdSense personalized Ofoto Flickr tagging, community Britannica Online Wikipedia community, free content Webseiten blogging dialogue publishing participation CMS wikis flexibility, freedom directories tagging community taxonomy folksonomy Consumers  Prosumers

13. What is the Web 2.0? - Examples • Gmail • Google Documents (Collaborative Notepad in the Web) • Wikis • Wikipedia • Worlds biggest encyclopedia, Top 30 web site, 100 langueges • Del.icio.us (Social Tagging for Bookmarks) • Flickr (Photo Sharing and Tagging) • Blogs, RSS, Blogger.com • Programmableweb.com (APIs)

14. Blogs • Easy usable user interfaces to update contents • Easy organization of contents • Easy usage of contents • Easy publishing of comments • Social: collaborative (single users but strongly connected)‏ 14

15. Wikis • Wiki  invented by Ward Cunningham • Collection of HTML sites: read and edit • Most famous and biggest Wiki: Wikipedia (MediaWiki) • But: Also often used in Intranets (i. e. our group) • Problems solved socially instead of technically • Flexible structure • Background algorithms + human intelligence • No new technologies • social: collaborative (nobody owns contents)‏

16. Wikis: Design Principles • Open Should a page be found to be incomplete or poorly organized, any reader can edit it as they see fit. • Incremental Pages can cite other pages, including pages that have not been written yet. • Organic The structure and text content of the site are open to editing and evolution. • Mundane A small number of (irregular) text conventions will provide access to the most useful page markup. • Universal The mechanisms of editing and organizing are the same as those of writing so that any writer is automatically an editor and organizer. • Overt The formatted (and printed) output will suggest the input required to reproduce it. Source: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiDesignPrinciples

17. Tagging • Idea: Enrich contents by user chosen keywords • Replace folder based structure by a organisation using tags • New: Simple user interfaces for tagging and tag based search • First steps to Semantic Web? • Technically: user interfaces • Social: collaborative (own contents, shared tags)

18. Tagging: Flickr.com

19. Collaborative Tagging

20. Collaborative Tagging: Delicious • Browser plug-ins available from http://del.icio.us • Allows the tagging of bookmarks • Community aspect: • Suggestion of tags that were used by other users • Availability of tag clouds for bookmarks of the whole community • Possibility to browse related bookmarks based on tags

21. User Tag Resource Tag Resource User Tag Resource Tag Resource User Tag Resource Folksonomies Data created by tagging, knowledge structures Mary tags www.wikipedia.org with wiki wikipedia encyclopedia Bob tags www.wikipedia.org with wiki web2.0 encyclopedia knowledge

22. Folksonomies: Taxonomie Marlow et al. (2006) • Rights for Tagging • Self-tagging: Contents only tagged by owner (Technorati) • Free-for-all tagging: Tagging by all users (Yahoo!) • Support of Tagging • Blind Tagging: Existing Tags are not displayed (Flickr) • Viewable Tagging: Existing Tags are displayed (Del.icio.us) • Suggestive Tagging: Suggestions for Tags (MyWeb 2.0) • Aggregation of Tags • Bag-model: Multiple entries (Del.icio.us) • Set-model: Only single entries (YouTube)

23. Tag Clouds Size of Tags: count of usage Browsing replaces Searching Different meaning for different users Orientation in Information Set

24. What is the Web 2.0? Trends for Web Applications • Technical Evolution • Web User Interfaces become faster (AJAX) • Desktop shifts to Web (GMail, Google Notebooks, AJAX) • Social Evolution • Collective creates additional value (Wiki, Tagging) • Free contents become popular (Licenses) • Attention is getting monetarized (Text-Ads) • Websites with additional value by recombination (Mash-Ups, RSS)

25. Web 2.0 People, Services, Technologies

26. Web 2.0 • Web 2.0 is a vaguely defined phrase referring to various topics such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies. • Tim O'Reilly provided a definition of Web 2.0 in 2006: "Web 2.0 is the business revolution in the computer industry caused by the move to the internet as platform, and an attempt to understand the rules for success on that new platform. Chief among those rules is this: Build applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them." • Tim BL is right that all these ideas are already underlying his original web ideas, however, …

27. Web 2.0 The four major breakthroughs of Web 2.0 are: • Blurring the distinction between content consumers and content providers. • Moving from media for individuals towards media for communities. • Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers. • Integrating human and machine computing in a new way.

28. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers Interactive Web applications through asynchronous JavaScript and XML (AJAX)

29. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers Interactive Web applications through asynchronous JavaScript and XML (AJAX)

30. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers: Weblogs or Blogs, Wikis

31. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers: Flickr, YouTube

32. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers Tagging – del.icio.us, shazam.com

33. Blurring the distinction between content consumers and providers RDFA, micro formats

34. Moving from a media for individuals towards a media for communities Folksomonies, FOAF

35. Moving from a media for individuals towards a media for communities Community pages (friend-of-a-friend, flickr, LinkedIn, myspace, …)

36. Moving from a media for individuals towards a media for communities Second Life

37. Moving from a media for individuals towards a media for communities Wikipedia

38. Moving from a media for individuals towards a media for communities Wikipedia

39. Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers RSS feeds

40. Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers Yahoo pipes allow people to connect internet data sources, process them, and redirect the output.

41. Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers Widgets, gadgets, and mashups.

42. Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers -Hands On: Twitter API Developer page: https://dev.twitter.com/ API start page: https://dev.twitter.com/overview/api

43. Blurring the distinction between service consumers and service providers -Hands On: Twitter API Twitter widgets: direct homepage integration of twitter content • Login to own twitter account • https://twitter.com/settings/widgets • „Create New Widget“ • .

44. Integrating human and machine computing in a new way Amazon mechanical turk, Fiverr, …etc.

45. Integrating human and machine computing in a new way Human computing (captchas)

46. Integrating human and machine computing in a new way - Hands On: Facebook API Developer page: https://developers.facebook.com Products: • Ad framework (Websites, Apps) • Analytics • App support • Facebook Login • Messaging • Marketing • Social Plugins  Like, share, send, comment directly from own website  Embedd Posts and videos in own website  more

47. Social Media Monitoring

48. SOCIAL SEMANTIC WEB:TECHNICAL SOLUTION AND ILLUSTRATIONS

49. Web 2.0 Web 3.0 Tagging • Annotation with Tags • Singular/Plural Problem • Synonyms • No Intelligence • Annotation with concepts • Inference (Tag „Dog“ --> Tag „Pet“) Recombination of data from different sources • Mash-Ups developed earlier by programmer • Spontaneous by End User Search • Keyword Search or Tag Search finds documents • Structured Search combines Data und creates documents Period • 2004 - 2007 • 2007 – 2010 Semantic Web + Web 2.0 = Web 3.0? Based on Völkl, Vrandecic and colleagues. 49

50. Web 3.0 Approaches • Automatic Extraction of knowledge based on large (and free) sets of data, generated by Web 2.0 • Integration and Reuse of knowledge (Yahoo Pipes) • Motivate users for generating semantic contents by using Web 2.0 paradigms • Creation of Semantic as side effect of working processes (semantic wikis)