Curs 11-12 - Web Semantic Ontologii - Slides
description
Transcript of Curs 11-12 - Web Semantic Ontologii - Slides
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 11
Web 2.0Semantic Web
Ontologii
Conf. Dr. I. Pop - 2009
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 22
Web 1.0Web 1.0 ca portal de informaţii:• Exclusivitatea informaţiei, mai la început pentru conţinutul propriu;• Divizarea WWW în directori utilizabili;• Fiecare beneficiar are propriul colţ mic în spaţiul Web;• Lipsuri:
o Contexto Interacţiune o scalabilitate
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 33
Web 2.0: Evoluţie spre oplatformă Read/Write
Web 1.0(1993-2003)
pagini HTML văzute printr-un browser
Web 2.0(2003- beyond)
pagini Web, plus un lot de altfel de “conţinut” partajat pe web, cu mai multă interactivitate; mai mult decât o aplicaţie pe o
“pagină”
“Read” Formă “Write” & Contribuţie
“Pagină” Unit Primară de conţinut
“Post / record”
“static” Stare “dinamic”
Web browser Văzut prin… Browsers, RSS Readers, altele
“Client Server” Arhitectură “Web Services”
Web Coderi Crearea Conţinutuluide…
Oricine
“specialiştilor” Domeniul al… “amatorizare de masă”
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 44
Web 2.0 – ca platformaWeb Services / API’s“Folksonomies” / Content tagging“AJAX”RSS
TehnologiiEmergente
Aplicaţiicunoscute
FlickrHi5Google MapsBlogging & Content SyndicationCraigslistLinkedin, Tribes, Ryze, Friendster
Unele aplicaţiimai puţin necunoscute
Del.icio.usUpcoming.org43Things.com
Majoritarretaileri
Amazon API’sGoogle Adsense APIYahoo APIEbay API
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 55
Flickr este o reţea socială pentrudistribuire fotografii.
Flickr shows me photos from my network
My contacts “tags” are available to me
Flickr combină o reţea socială cu conţinut generat de utilizator. Utilizatorii pot lucra colaborativ pe proiecte foto şi poate fiecare să caute şi să găsească noi fotografii. Flickr are un API pentru servicii web pentru a integra colecţii foto cu bloguri şi alte aplicaţii.
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 66
Del.icio.us este un exemplu de site care utilizează“Folksonomy” pentru a organiza Bookmarkuri
Tags: Cuvinte descriptive aplicate de useri pt. linkuri. Ele suntcercetabile
My Tags: Cuvinte care seutilizează pt. a descrielinkuri într-un mod în care au sens pt. cel ce descrie.
Un “folksonomy” este o lucrare spontană şicolaborativă pentru a categorisi linkuri ale uneicomunităţi de useri. Userii fac control şi organizare de conţinut împreună.
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 77
Wikipedia este un Dicţionar Colaborativ putând fi editat in timp real de oricine
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 88
Blogging este cel mai recunoscutexemplu de Web 2.0
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 99
Chicago Crimes – Date de crime zilnicepe Google Maps, trimise ţie prin RSS
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1010
Chicago Crime - continuare
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1111
Reţelele Sociale conectează useri într-ocomunitate de trust (sau de interese)
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1212
RSS Adoption este mai recent, dar ar putea fi uninstrument atractiv pentru marketerii de nişă
RSS (Really Simple Syndication) este o tehnologie emergentă care permiteuserilor să se alimenteze “feeds” cu date din conţinuturile publicate via browsersau instrument special newsreader. Articolele vin la user fără spam, pe cerere, şiintr-un format uşor de digerat.
Feeds contain news items/stories
Items have a brief summary included in the feed
Users can read the full content of some stories within their browser or desktop app without going to orgincating website
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1313
O modalitate nouă de a recepţiona conţinut…
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1414
Cum lucrează: Exemplu CNN Interactiv
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1515
Exemple de RSS Reader
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1616
Exemple RSS
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1717
RSS Examples
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1818
Useri care utilizează aplicaţii Web 2.0 sunt puternic angajaţi, activi şi atractivi pentru Marketeri
Bloggingul este un proxy bun pentru activităţi web 2.0.
Blog readers consume a LOT of media
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 1919
Userii găsesc ajutor în conţinutul de Blog şi sunt receptivi la Online Ads
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 2020
Oportunităţi tactice pentru adoptivii timpurii & marketeri
Blogging / Blogs RSS / Feeds
Drive Traffic to the Site
Improves placement and relevance in search enginesCould generate repeat
visits to siteGenerates interest in
deeper engagement
Generate “reminder” traffic“Push” key product or
promotion out to audience, to drive traffic back to your site
Broaden reach through syndication, driving more traffic back to your site
Improve Customer Experience
Helps explain products, service, approachProvides “support”
through direct customer Q & A
Generate deeper insite into user attitudes and behaviors
Feeds make it easier to stay connected and aware, driving convenience
More information = more competence = more control
Drive Conversions
Generate “trial” usageBlogs and post drive
deeper engagement and helps overcome objections
Drives frequency, which may lower the barrier to awareness and trial
Watch & Wait Act Now
Web Services
Tags & Folksonomies
Social Networks
RSS Blogging
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 2121
Web 2.0 va fi mijlocul decomunicare pentru marketeri
More users are connecting to each other and content through networked, peer-driven activities & content
• Linkedin now has service referrals as part of their package
API’s and Content syndication will lead to more machine generated connections
• “Non-compliant” content won’t fit into the flow as readily
Web 2.0 is truly two-way• Marketers need to be very willing to
“listen” and receive more than broadcast
User-generated content may be more valuable to users than yours
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 2222
Probleme deschise / Implicaţii
What expectations does this set?Who owns the message?How can marketers use this to their advantage?Are “massses” better than “experts”
Agrearea Web-lui 2.0 este legată denatura aplicaţiilor / instrumetelor
•Direct•Transparent•Controlabil
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 2323
Aplicaţii, Infrastructură, TehnologiiWeb Services, Grids şi Web 2.0 (Enterprise 2.0) suntTehnologiiAceste tehnologii se combină şi se competează pentru a construi infrastructurile electronice numite e-infrastructure sau Cyberinfrastructuree-moreorlessanything este o aplicaţie apărută în aria de largă importanţă care se bazează pe infrastructurile e-infrastructure or Cyberinfrastructure
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 24242424
“Best Web 2.0 Sites” -- 2006Extracted from http://web2.wsj2.com/Social Networking
Start Pages
Social Bookmarking
Peer Production News
Social Media Sharing
Online Storage (Computing)
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 2525
Sistemele Web 2.0 sunt Portaluri, Servicii, ResurseCaptează dezvelotări incredibile ale site-urilor Web interactive care permit crearea şi colaborarea
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 26262626
Mashups vs. WorkflowMashup Tools are reviewed at http://blogs.zdnet.com/Hinchcliffe/?p=63Workflow Tools are reviewed by Gannon and Fox http://grids.ucs.indiana.edu/ptliupages/publications/Workflow-overview.pdfBoth include scripting in PHP, Python, sh etc. as both implement distributed programming at level of servicesMashups use all types of service interfaces and do not have the potential robustness (security) of Grid service approachTypically “pure”HTTP (REST)
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 27272727
Grid Workflow Datamining in Earth ScienceWork with Scripps InstituteGrid services controlled by workflow process real time data from ~70 GPS Sensors in Southern California
Streaming DataSupport
TransformationsData Checking
Hidden MarkovDatamining (JPL)
Display (GIS)
NASA GPS
Earthquake
Real Time
Archival
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 28282828
Web 2.0 uses all types of ServicesHere a Gadget Mashup uses a 3 service workflow with a JavaScript Gadget Client
Web 2.0 APIshttp://www.programmableweb.com/apis has (May 14 2007) 431 Web 2.0 APIs with GoogleMaps the most often used in MashupsThis site acts as a “UDDI”for Web 2.0
The List of Web 2.0 API’s
Each site has API and its featuresDivided into broad categoriesOnly a few used a lot (42 API’s used in more than 10 mashups)RSS feed of new APIsAmazon S3 growing in popularity
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 3131
APIs/Mashups per Protocol Distribution
REST SOAP XML-RPC REST,XML RPC
REST,XML RPC
REST,SOAP
JS Other
google google mapsmaps
netvibesnetvibes
live.comlive.com
virtual virtual earthearth
google google searchsearch
amazon S3amazon S3
amazon amazon ECSECS
flickrflickrebayebay
youtubeyoutube
411sync411syncdel.icio.usdel.icio.us
yahoo! searchyahoo! searchyahoo! geocodingyahoo! geocoding
technoratitechnorati
yahoo! imagesyahoo! imagestrynttrynt
yahoo! localyahoo! local
Number ofMashups
Number ofAPIs
4 more Mashups each day
For a total of 1906April 17 2007 (4.0 a day over last month)Note ClearForestruns Semantic Web Services Mashupcompetitions (not workflow competitions)Some Mashuptypes: aggregators, search aggregators, visualizers, mobile, maps, gamesGrowing number of commercial Mashup Tools
5/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009 3333
Mash Planet
Web 2.0 Architectur
ehttp://www.imagine-it.org/mashplanetDisplay too large to be a Gadget
5/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009 3434
Searched on Transit/TransportationSearched on Transit/Transportation
5/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009 3535
Browser +Google Map
API
Cass County Map Server(OGC Web Map Server)
Hamilton County Map
Server(AutoDesk)
Marion County Map Server
(ESRI ArcIMS)
Browser client fetches image tiles for the bounding box using Google Map API.
Tile Server
Cache Server
Adapter Adapter Adapter
Tile Server requests map tiles at all zoom levels with all layers. These are converted to uniform projection, indexed, and stored. Overlapping images are combined.
Must provide adapters for each Map Server type .
The cache server fulfills Google map calls with cached tiles at the requested bounding box that fill the bounding box.
Google Maps Server
A “Grid” Workflow(built in Java!)
Uses Google Maps clients and server and non Google map APIs
5/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009 3636
GIS Grid of “Indiana Map” and ~10 Indiana counties with accessible Map (Feature) Servers from different vendors. Grids federate different data repositories (cf Astronomy VO federating different observatory collections)
Indiana Map Grid Workflow/Mashup
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 3737
Now to Portals3737
Grid-style portal as used in Earthquake GridThe Portal is built from portlets
– providing user interface fragments for each service that are composed into the full interface – uses OGCE technology as does planetary science VLAB portal with University of Minnesota
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 38383838
Portlets v. Google GadgetsPortals for Grid Systems are built using portlets with software like GridSphere integrating these on the server-side into a single web-pageGoogle (at least) offers the Google sidebar and Google home page which support Web 2.0 services and do not use a server side aggregatorGoogle is more user friendly!The many Web 2.0 competitions is an interesting model for promoting development in the world-wide distributed collection of Web 2.0 developersI guess Web 2.0 model will win!
Note the many competitions powering Web 2.0 Mashup Development
Typical Google Gadget Structure
… Lots of HTML and JavaScript </Content> </Module>Portlets build User Interfaces by combining fragments in a standalone Java ServerGoogle Gadgets build User Interfaces by combining fragments with JavaScript on the client
Google Gadgets are an example of Start Page technologySee http://blogs.zdnet.com/Hinchcliffe/?p=8
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 4040
Web 2.0 v Narrow Grid IWeb 2.0 and Grids are addressing a similar application classalthough Web 2.0 has focused on user interactions• So technology has similar requirements
Web 2.0 chooses simplicity (REST rather than SOAP) to lower barrier to everyone participatingWeb 2.0 and Parallel Computing tend to use traditional (possibly visual) (scripting) languages for equivalent of workflow whereas Grids use visual interface backend recorded in BPELWeb 2.0 and Grids both use SOA Service Oriented Architectures“System of Systems”: Grids and Web 2.0 are likely to build systems hierarchically out of smaller systems• We need to support Grids of Grids, Webs of Grids, Grids of
Services etc. i.e. systems of systems of all sorts
4040
Web 2.0 v Narrow Grid IIWeb 2.0 has a set of major services like GoogleMaps or Flickr but the world is composing Mashups that make new composite services• End-point standards are set by end-point owners• Many different protocols covering a variety of de-facto standards
Narrow Grids have a set of major software systems like Condor and Globus and a different world is extending with custom services and linking with workflowPopular Web 2.0 Tehnologii are PHP, JavaScript, JSON, AJAXand REST with “Start Page” e.g. (Google Gadgets) interfacesPopular Narrow Grid Tehnologii are Apache Axis, BPEL WSDL and SOAP with portlet interfacesRobustness of Grids demanded by the Enterprise?Not so clear that Web 2.0 won’t eventually dominate other application areas and with Enterprise 2.0 it’s invading Grids
The world does itself in large numbers!
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 4242
Web 2.0 v Narrow Grid IIINarrow Grids have a strong emphasis on standards and structure; Web 2.0 lets a 1000 flowers (protocols) and a million developers bloom and focuses on functionality, broad usability and simplicity• Semantic Web/Grid has structure to allow reasoning• Annotation in sites like del.icio.us and uploading to
MySpace/YouTube is unstructured and free text search replaces structured ontologies
Portals are likely to feature both Web and “desktop client” technology although it is possible that Web approach will be adopted more or less uniformlyWeb 2.0 has a very active portal activity which has similar architecture to Grids • A page has multiple user interface fragments
Web 2.0 user interface integration is typically Client side using Gadgets AJAX and JavaScript while• Grids are in a special JSR168 portal server side using Portlets WSRP and
Java4242
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 4343
The Ten areas covered by the 60 core WS-* Specifications
WS-* Specification Area Typical Grid/Web Service Examples1: Core Service Model XML, WSDL, SOAP
2: Service Internet WS-Addressing, WS-MessageDelivery; Reliable Messaging WSRM; Efficient Messaging MOTM
3: Notification WS-Notification, WS-Eventing (Publish-Subscribe)
4: Workflow and Transactions BPEL, WS-Choreography, WS-Coordination
5: Security WS-Security, WS-Trust, WS-Federation, SAML, WS-SecureConversation
6: Service Discovery UDDI, WS-Discovery
7: System Metadata and State WSRF, WS-MetadataExchange, WS-Context
8: Management WSDM, WS-Management, WS-Transfer
9: Policy and Agreements WS-Policy, WS-Agreement
10: Portals and User Interfaces WSRP (Remote Portlets)
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 4444
WS-* Areas and Web 2.0WS-* Specification Area Web 2.0 Approach
1: Core Service Model XML becomes optional but still usefulSOAP becomes JSON RSS ATOM WSDL becomes REST with API as GET PUT etc.Axis becomes XmlHttpRequest
2: Service Internet No special QoS. Use JMS or equivalent?3: Notification Hard with HTTP without polling– JMS perhaps?
4: Workflow and Transactions (no Transactions in Web 2.0)
Mashups, Google MapReduceScripting with PHP JavaScript ….
5: Security SSL, HTTP Authentication/Authorization, OpenID is Web 2.0 Single Sign on
6: Service Discovery http://www.programmableweb.com
7: System Metadata and State Processed by application – no system state –Microformats are a universal metadata approach
8: Management==Interaction WS-Transfer style Protocols GET PUT etc.
9: Policy and Agreements Service dependent. Processed by application
10: Portals and User Interfaces Start Pages, AJAX and Widgets(Netvibes) Gadgets
5/11/20095/11/2009 I. Pop Spring 2009I. Pop Spring 2009 4545
Drivers for FutureWeb 2.0 has momentum as it is driven by success of social web sites and the user friendly protocols attracting many developers of mashupsGrids momentum driven by the success of eScience and the commercial web service thrusts largely aimed at EnterpriseWe expect Aplicaţii such as business and DoD where predictability and robustness important to be built on a Web Service (Narrow Grid) core with Web 2.0 functionality enhancementsSimplicity, supporting many developers are forces pressuring Grids!Robustness and coping with unstructured blooming of a 1000 flowers are forces pressuring Web 2.0