DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND

ENGINEERING
SREENIDHI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(An Autonomous Institution approved by UGC and Affiliated to JNTUH)
Yamnampet, Ghatkesar, Hyderabad – 501 301

Technical Paper Writing and Seminar

on
Semantic Web by
N. Hema Harika
(21311A6960)

of

II year I semester of CSEIOT

on

31/01/2023

TECH SEM COORDINATOR

Dr. T. Venkat Narayana Rao

Professor of CSE, Tech Seminar Coordinator

SREENIDHI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

 Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Sreenidhi Institute of Science and technology

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this technical report on “Semantic Web”,submitted

by N. Hema Harika(21311A6960), in the year 2023 in partial fulfilment of
the academic requirements of Sreenidhi Institute of Science and
Technology for the award of the Degree of Bachelor of Technology in
Computer Science and Engineering, is a bonafide work that has been
carried out by her as part of her Technical Presentation during Second
Year First Semester.
This report has not been submitted to any other institute or
university forthe award of any Degree.

Dr.T.Venkat Narayana Rao

Professor of CSE Department
SREENIDHI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

HOD Signature with Stamp

 INDEX

S.No LIST OF CONTENTS PAGE NO

1. ABSTRACT 1

2. TECHNICAL REPORT 2-6

3. BASE PAPER 7-14

4. PRESENTATION SLIDES 15-30

5. REFERENCES 31
 Abstract

The Semantic Web is an evolving development of the World Wide Web in which the
meaning (semantics) of information and services on the web is defined, making it
possible for the web to "understand" and satisfy the requests of people and machines
to use the web content. At its core, the semantic web comprises a set of design
principle. collaborative working groups, and a variety of enabling technologies. Some
elements of the semantic web are expressed as prospective future possibilities that
are yet to be implemented or realized. Other elements of the semantic web are
expressed in formal specifications. Some of these include Resource Description
Framework (RDF), a variety of data interchange formats (e.g. RDF/XML, N3, Turtle, N-
Triples), and notations such as RDF Schema (RDFS) and the Web Ontology Language
(OWL), all of which are intended to provide a formal description of concepts, terms,
and relationships within a given knowledge . The key components of semantic web
technology are as follows: 1. OWL: The Web Ontology Language (OWL) is a family of
knowledge representation languages for authoring ontologies endorsed by the World
Wide Web Consortium. They are characterized by formal semantics and RDF/XML-
based serializations for the Semantic Web. OWL has attracted both academic, medical
and commercial interest. 2. Resource Description Format: The Resource Description
Framework (RDF) is a family of World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) specifications
originally designed as a metadata data model. It has come to be used as a general
method for conceptual description or modeling of information that is implemented in
web resources, using a variety of syntax formats. 3. RDF Schema: RDF Schema
(various abbreviated as RDFS, RDF(S), RDF-S, or RDF/S) is an extensible knowledge
representation language, providing basic elements for the description of ontologies,
otherwise called Resource Description Framework (RDF) vocabularies, intended to
structure RDF resources. 4. Microformat: A microformat (sometimes abbreviated μF)
is a web-based approach to semantic markup that seeks to re-use existing
HTML/XHTML tags to convey metadata and other attributes, in web pages and other
contexts that support (X)HTML, such as RSS. This approach allows information
intended for end-users .

1
 SEMANTIC WEB
engine. Unfortunately, the results you’re
1. Introduction presented with are hardly

Currently the focus of a W3C working group, the

Semantic Web vision was conceived by Tim
helpful. There are listings for dish detergents,
Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web.
facial soaps, and even soap operas mixed into
The World Wide Web changed the way we
the results. Only after sifting through multiple
communicate, the way we do business, the way
listings and reading through the linked pages are
we seek information and entertainment – the
you able to find information about the W3C’s
very way most of us live our daily lives. Calling it
SOAP specifications. Because, of the different
the next step in Web evolution, Berners-Lee
semantic associations of the word “soap,” the
defines the Semantic Web as “a web of data that
results you receive are varied in relevance and
can be processed directly and indirectly by
you still have to do a lot of work to find the
machines.” In the Semantic Web data itself
information you’re looking for. However, in a
becomes part of the Web and is able to be
Semantic Web-enabled environment, you could
processed independently of application, platform,
use a Semantic Web agent to search the Web for
or domain. This is in contrast to the World Wide
“SOAP” where SOAP is a type of technology
Web as we know it today, which contains virtually
specification used in Web services. This time, the
boundless information in the form of documents.
results of your search will be relevant. Your
We can use computers to search for these
Semantic Web agent can also search your
documents, but they still have to be read and
corporate network for the SOAP specification
interpreted by humans before any useful
and discover if your colleagues have completed
information can be extrapolated. Computers can
similar projects or have posted SOAP-related
present you with information but can’t
www.SeminarsTopics.com research on the
understand what the information is well enough
network. Based on the semantic information
to display the data that is most relevant in a given
available for SOAP, your agent also presents you
circumstance. The Semantic Web, on the other
with a list of related technologies. Now you know
hand, is about having data as well as documents
that WSDL, XML, and URI are all technologies
on the Web so that machines can process,
related to SOAP, and that you’ll need to do some
transform, assemble, and even act on the data in
research on them, too, before beginning your
useful ways. Imagine this scenario. You’re a
project. Armed with the information returned by
software consultant and have just received a new
your Semantic Web agent, you read the related
project. You’re to create a series of SOAP-based
technology specifications and send emails to the
Web services for one of your biggest clients. First,
colleagues who have made SOAP-related
you need to learn a bit about SOAP, so you
materials available on the network to ask for their
search for the term using your favorite search

2
input before starting your new project. World Wide Web. Examples of Web 2.0 include web
-based communities, hosted services, web
applications, social-networking sites, video-sharing
2. HISTORY sites, wikis, blogs, mashups, and folksonomies. A
Web 1.0: Web 2.0 site allows its users to interact with other
Web 1.0 (1991-2003) is a retronym users or to change website content, in contrast to
which refers to the state of the World Wide Web, non-interactive websites where users are limited to
and any website design style used before the the passive viewing of information that is provided
advent of the Web 2.0 phenomenon. Web 1.0 to them. Although the term suggests a new version
began with the release of the WWW to the public in of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an
1991, and is the general term that has been created update to any technical specifications, but rather to
to describe the Web before the "bursting of the Dot- cumulative changes in the ways software
com bubble" in 2001, which is seen by many as a developers and end-users use the Web.
turning point for the internet. 2.1.1 WEB 1.0 DESIGN Web 2.0 Characteristics :
ELEMENTS Some typical design elements of a Web Web 2.0 websites allow users to do
1.0 site include: • Static pages instead of dynamic more than just retrieve information. They can build
user-generated content. on the interactive facilities of "Web 1.0" to provide
• The use of framesets. "Network as platform" computing, allowing users to
• Proprietary HTML extensions such as the <blink> run software-applications entirely through a
and <marquee> tags introduced during the first browser. Users can own the data on a Web 2.0 site
browser war. and exercise control over that data .These sites
Online guest book may have an "Architecture of participation" that
• GIF buttons, typically 88x31 pixels in size encourages users to add value to the application as
promoting web browsers and other products. they use it. The concept of Web-as-participation-
• HTML forms sent via email. A user would fill in a platform captures many of these characteristics.
form, and upon clicking submit their email client Bart Decrem, a founder and former CEO of Flock,
would attempt to send an email containing the calls Web 2.0 the "participatory Web and regards
form's details. 2.1.2Web 1.0 Example: the Web-as-information-source as Web 1.0. The
2.2 impossibility of excluding group-members who
don’t contribute to the provision of goods from
sharing profits gives rise to the possibility that
rational members will prefer to withhold their
contribution of effort and free-ride on the
contribution of others.] This requires what is
sometimes called Radical Trust by the
management of the website. According to Best the
characteristics of Web 2.0 are: rich user experience,
user participation, dynamic content, metadata, web
standards and scalability. Further characteristics,
such as openness, freedom] and collective
Web 2.0 : intelligence] by way of user participation, can also
be viewed as essential attributes of Web 2.0.
The term "Web 2.0" (2004–present) is commonly
associated with web applications that facilitate
interactive information sharing, interoperability,
user-centered design and collaboration on the

3
 ways that one might want to do so. The Semantic
Web is a web of data. There is lots of data we all
use every day, and it is not part of the web. I can
see my bank statements on the web, and my
photographs, and I can see my appointments in a
calendar. But can I see my photos in a calendar to
see what I was doing when I took them? Can I see
bank statement lines in a calendar? Why not?
Because we don't have a web of data. Because
Web 2.0 Examples data is controlled by applications, and each
Facebook is a social networking site and it is a application keeps it to itself. The Semantic Web is
prominent example of web 2.0. This site allows about two things. It is about common formats for
user to make friends, write them messages, chat integration and combination of data drawn from
with them , upload and share photos etc. activities. diverse sources, where on the original Web mainly
3. Web 3.0 concentrated on the interchange of documents. It
A Basic Introduction: The Semantic Web is is also about language for recording how the data
a mesh of information linked up in such a way as to relates to real world objects. That allows a person,
be easily processable by machines, on a global or a machine, to start off in one database, and then
scale. You can think of it as being an efficient way move through an unending set of databases which
of representing data on the World Wide Web, or as are connected not by wires but by being about the
a globally linked database. The Semantic Web was same thing.
thought up by Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the
WWW, URIs, HTTP, and HTML. There is a dedicated
team of people at the World Wide Web consortium
(W3C) working to improve, extend and standardize
the system, and many languages, publications,
tools and so on have already been developed.
However, Semantic Web technologies are still very
much in their infancies, and although the future of
4.0 The Semantic Web Vision
the project in general appears to be bright, there
Today’s Web
seems to be little consensus about the likely
The World Wide Web has changed the way people
direction and characteristics of the early Semantic
communicate with each other and the way
Web. What's the rationale for such a system? Data
business is conducted. It lies at the heart of a
that is generally hidden away in HTML files is often
revolution which is currently transforming the
useful in some contexts, but not in others. The
developed world towards a knowledge economy,
problem with the majority of data on the Web that
and more broadly speaking, to a knowledge society.
is in this form at the moment is that it is difficult to
This development has also changed the way we
use on a large scale, because there is no global
think of computers. Originally they were used for
system for publishing data in such a way as it can
computing numerical calculations. Currently their
be easily processed by anyone. For example, just
predominant use is information processing, typical
think of information about local sports events,
applications being data bases, text processing, and
weather information, plane times, Major League
games. At present there is a transition of focus
Baseball statistics, and television guides... all of
towards the view of computers as entry points to
this information is presented by numerous sites,
the information highways. Most of today’s Web
but all in HTML. The problem with that is that, is
content is suitable for human consumption. Even
some contexts, it is difficult to use this data in the
Web content that is generated automatically from
4
data bases is usually presented without the original retrieving the information (for some limited
structural information found in data bases. Typical exceptions see the next section), an activity that
uses of the Web today involve humans seeking and can be very time-consuming. Therefore the term
consuming information, searching and getting in information retrieval, used in association with
touch with other humans, reviewing the catalogs of search engines, is somewhat misleading, location
online stores and ordering products by filling out finder might be a more appropriate term. Also,
forms, and viewing adult material. These activities results of Web searches are not readily accessible
are not particularly well supported by software by other software tools; search engines are often
tools. Apart from the existence of links which isolated applications. The main obstacle for
establish connections between documents, the providing a better support to Web users is that, at
main valuable, indeed indispensable, kind of tools present, the meaning ofWeb content is not machine
are search engines. Keyword-based search engines, accessible. Of course there are tools that can
such as AltaVista, Yahoo and Google, are the main retrieve texts, split them into parts, check the
tool for using today’s Web. It is clear that the Web spelling, decompose them, put them together in
would not have been the huge success it was, were various ways, and count their words. But when it
it not for search engines. However there are comes to interpreting sentences and extracting
serious problems associated with their use. Here useful information for users, the capabilities of
we list the main ones: • High recall, low precision: current software is still very limited.
Even if the main relevant pages are retrieved, they 5.0 A Layered Approach :
are of little use if another 28,758 mildly relevant or The development of the Semantic Web
irrelevant documents were also retrieved. Too
much can easily become as bad as too little. • Low
or no recall: Often it happens that we don’t get any
answer for our request, or that important and
relevant pages are not retrieved. Although low
recall is a less frequent problem with current
search engines, it does occur. This is often due to
the third problem: • Results highly sensitive to
vocabulary: Often we have to use semantically
similar keywords to get the results we wish; in
these cases the relevant documents use different proceeds in steps, each step building a layer on top
terminology from the original query. This behaviour of another. The pragmatic justification for this
is unsatisfactory, since semantically similar queries approach is that it is easier to achieve consensus
should return similar results. on small steps, while it is much harder to get
• Results are single Web pages: If we need everyone on board if too much is attempted.
information that is spread over various documents, Usually there are several research groups moving in
then we must initiate several queries to collect the different directions; this competition of ideas is a
relevant documents, and then we must manually major driving force for scientific progress. However,
extract the partial information and put it together. from an engineering perspective there is a need to
Interestingly, despite obvious improvements in standardize. So if most researchers agree on
search engine technology, the difficulties remain certain issues and disagree on others, it makes
essentially the same. It seems that the amount of sense to fix the points of agreement. This way,
Web content outgrows the technological progress. even if the more ambitious research efforts should
But even if a search is successful, it is the human fail, there will be at least partial positive outcomes.
who has to browse selected retrieved documents Once a a standard has been established, many
to extract the information he is actually looking for. more groups and companies will adopt it, instead
In other words, there is not much support for of waiting to see which of the alternative research
5
lines will be successful in the end. The nature of deductive process, as well as the representation of
the Semantic Web is such that companies and proofs in Web languages (from lower levels) and
single users must build tools, add content and use proof validation. Finally trust will emerge through
that content. We cannot wait until the full Semantic the use of digital signatures, and other kind of
Web vision materializes – it may take another 10 knowledge, based on recommendations by agents
years for it to be realized to its full extent (as we trust, or rating and certification agencies and
envisioned today, of course!). In building one layer consumer bodies. Sometimes the word Web of
of the SemanticWeb on top of another, there are Trust is used, to indicate that trust will be
someprinciples that should be followed: 1. organised in the same distributed and chaotic way
Downward compatibility: Agents fully aware of a as theWWWitself. Being located at the top of the
layer should also be able to interpret and use pyramid, trust is a high-level and crucial concept:
information written at lower levels. For example, The Web will only achieve its full potential when
agents aware of the semantics of OWL can take users have trust in its operations (security) and the
full advantage of information written in RDF and quality of information provided.
RDF Schema. 2. Upward partial understanding: On Difference between Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and Web 3.0:
the other hand, agents fully aware of a layer should Web 1.0:
take at least partial advantage of information at The Internet before 1999, experts call it
higher levels. For example, an agent aware only of Read-Only era. The average internet user's role was
the RDF and RDF Schema semantics can interpret limited only to reading the information presented to
knowledge written in OWL partly, by disregarding him. The best examples are millions of static
those elements that go beyond RDF and RDF websites which mushroomed during the.com boom.
Schema. Figure shows the “layer cake” of the There was no active communication or information
Semantic Web, which is due to Tim Berners-Lee flow from consumer of the information to producer
and describes the main layers of the Semantic Web of the information. Web 2.0: The lack of active
designand vision. At the bottom we find XML, a interaction of common user with the web lead to
language that lets one write structuredWeb the birth of Web 2.0. The year 1999 marked the
documents with a user-defined vocabulary. XML is beginning of a Read-Write-Publish era with notable
particularly suitable for sending documents across contributions from LiveJournal (Launched in April,
the Web. RDF is a basic data model, like the entity- 1999) and Blogger (Launched in August, 1999).
relationship model, for writing simple statements Now even a non-technical user can actively interact
about Web objects (resources). The RDF data & contribute to the web using different blog
model does not rely on XML, but RDF has an XML- platforms. This era empowered the common user
based syntax. Therefore in Figure it is located on with a few new concepts viz. Blog, Social-Media &
top of the XML layer. RDF Schema provides Video-Streaming. Publishing your content is only a
modelling primitives for organizingWeb objects into few clicks away! Few remarkable developments of
hierarchies. Key primitives are classes and Web 2.0 are Twitter, YouTube, eZineArticles, Flickr
properties, subclass and subproperty relationships, and Facebook. Web 3.0: It seems we have
and domain and range restrictions. RDF Schema is everything whatever we had wished for in Web 2.0,
based on RDF. RDF Schema can be viewed as a but it is way behind when it comes to intelligence.
primitive language for writing ontologies. But there Perhaps a six year old child has a better analytical
is a need for more powerful ontology languages abilities than the existing search technologies!
that expand RDF Schema and allow the Keyword based search of web 2.0 resulted in an
representations of more complex relationships information overload. The following attributes are
between Web objects. The logic layer is used to going to be a part of Web 3.0: • contextual Search •
enhance the ontology language further, and to Tailor made Search • Personalized Search •
allow to write application-specific declarative Evolution of 3D Web • Deductive Reasoning Though
knowledge. The proof layer involves the actual Web is yet to see something which can be termed
6
as fairly intelligent but the efforts to achieve this has attracted interest and scepticism in equal
goal has already began. 2 weeks back the Official measure. The initiative was inspired by the vision of
Google Blog mentioned about how Google search its founder, Tim Berners-Lee, of a more flexible,
algorithm is now getting intelligent as it can identify integrated, automatic and self-adapting Web,
many synonyms. For example Pictures & Photos providing a richer and more interactive experience
are now treated as similar in meaning. From now for users. The W3C has developed a set of
onwards your search query GM crop will not lead standards and tools to support this vision, and after
you to GM (General Motors) website. Why? Cause, several years of research and development, these
firstby synonym identification Google will are now usable and could make a real impact.
understand that GM may mean General Motors or However, people are still asking how they can be
Genetically Modified. Then by context i.e. by the used in practical situations to solve real problems.
keyword crop it will deduce that the user wants This article discusses the current state of the
information on genetically modified crops and not Semantic Web, and how it may impact on the UK
on General Motors. Similarly, GM car will not lead Higher and Further Education sectors over the next
you to genetically modified crop. Try out yourself to few years. It introduces Tim Berners-Lee's initial
check how this newly added artificial intelligence vision for the Semantic Web, briefly discussing the
works in Google. Also, there are many websites technology and tools now available to support it,
built on Web 3.0 which personalizes your search. taking a look at the 'layer-cake' diagram of the
The web is indeed getting intelligent. Semantic Web architecture. The impact of the
Semantic Web is likely to be particularly strong in
distance learning, libraries and information
management, and collaborative research; we shall
take a look at each. The UK is particularly strong in
these areas, and we present a roundup of the
research and development, with an emphasis on the
leading UK research teams.

2. SOME DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND The

term 'Semantic Web' is one which is widely used,
often without much care or understanding of its
origins and meaning. However, in general there are
three main views of the term which are widely used:
the vision, the programme and the technology.

2.1 The Vision The Semantic Web is inspired by a

vision of the current Web which has been in the
background since its inception, and which is
influenced by earlier work dating back to Vannevar
Bush’s idea of the 'memex' machine in the 1940s
(based on a universal library, complete with a
searchable catalogue) . Tim Berners-Lee originally
envisioned the WWW as including richer
BASE PAPER descriptions of documents and links between them .
However, in the effort to provide a simple, usable
1. INTRODUCTION: and robust working system, which could be used by
THE SEMANTIC WEB IN THE NEWS The Semantic
Web initiative of the World-Wide Web Consortium
(W3C) has been active for the last few years and
7
everyone 'out-of-the-box', these ideas were put to content, as conventional search engines do, but also
one side, and the simpler, more human-mediated from a description. The problem is exemplified by
Web which the frustration in finding articles written by a
particular author, rather than those which include
the author’s name. In response to the query 'Tim
we know today resulted. The bigger vision found Berners-Lee' a search engine will respond with all
expression in an article written by Tim Berners-Lee, the papers including that phrase, some of which will
Jim Hendler and Ora Lassila in Scientific American be by Tim Berners-Lee, but most of which will cite or
in May 2001 . In this article they refer to him – as this paper does. The Semantic
Web can allow each document on the Web to be
annotated stating who its author was, when it was
provide a compelling vision of a world where instead created, and what content it has; then only those
of people laboriously trawling through information with the appropriate author will be returned. To add
on the Web and negotiating with each other directly these descriptions or annotations, it is necessary to
to carry out routine tasks such as scheduling state what this additional description, sometimes
appointments, finding documents and locating known as 'metadata', should be, and how it should
services, the Web itself can do the hard work for be interpreted. How this is done is the subject of the
them. This can be done by providing sufficient programme set out in the next section. 2.2 The
context about resources on the Web and also Programme It was not until the Semantic Web
providing the tools to use the context so that Roadmap appeared, setting out a plan for re-
machines (or 'software agents' – programs working engineering the Web to achieve this vision, that the
on behalf of people) can find the right things and Semantic Web became a programme. The Semantic
make decisions. Web is an initiative of the World-Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) , the international organisation
In the words of the article: 'The Semantic Web will which sets standards for the technologies which
bring structure to the meaningful content of Web underlie the World-Wide Web. The W3C was set up
pages, creating an environment where software when it became clear that there was a danger of the
agents roaming from page to page can readily carry Web breaking apart through the pressure of
out sophisticated tasks for users.' This is an competing commercial interests, and it is now a
ambitious long-term aim: nothing less than imbuing major forum providing information infrastructure
the Web itself with meaning. That is, providing between people and organisations in the world.
meaningful ways to describe the resources Headed by Tim Berners-Lee, the W3C seeks to
available on the Web and, perhaps more importantly, maintain the interoperability and universality of the
why there are links connecting them together . Thus Web via the setting of open standards to which Web
the notion arises of semantics being part of the tools should conform – independent of particular
Web, capturing the reason things are there. Once interests. It is funded by member subscription and
the Web has a mechanism for defining semantics there are some 400 members world wide. Members
about resources and links, then the possibility arises include the leading commercial companies in the
for automatic processing of the Web by software field as well as many not-for-profit organisations
agents, rather than mediation by people. In the and universities. The Semantic Web initiative was
same article, the Semantic Web is defined as: started as the Web Metadata Working Group in
'…an extension of the current Web in which 1998, and subsequently became the Semantic Web
information is given well-defined meaning, better Activity which has taken the view that the Semantic
enabling computers and people to work in Web: '… provides a common framework that allows
cooperation.' A simple example used to motivate data to be shared and reused across application,
the Semantic Web is the need to discover enterprise, and community boundaries. It is a
documents on the Web, not only from their textual collaborative effort led by W3C with participation

8
from a large number of researchers and industrial been in the tens of millions of pounds. Also notable
partners. It is based on the Resource Description within the Semantic Web is how communities of
Framework, which integrates a variety of individual developers and users are working
applications using XML for syntax and URIs for together to provide tools and information
naming.' Early work produced two influential collaboratively. However, in order to make a major
proposals: the Resource Description Framework impact on the IT infrastructure, major IT companies
Model and Syntax Specification , and the Resource will need to take part. Companies such as
Description Framework Schema Specification . HewlettPackard and British Telecom are investing in
However, at that stage activity was on a small scale research programmes in the area, and with the base
and there was confusion on its scope and recommendations now in place, opportunities are
usefulness, so work returned to a more exploratory emerging that will allow the initiative to have
phase. The DAML programme, a DARPAsponsored considerable impact in the next few years. 2.3 The
initiative in the US, was set up and proposed Technologies The
several influential approaches to the third common use
problems posed by the Semantic Web . of the term
Within the last two to three years, work has Semantic Web is
moved on within W3C with increased vigour. to identify a set of
Two major working groups of the W3C, the technologies,
RDF Core Working Group and the Web tools and
Ontology Working Group have produced standards which
major sets of recommendations. Exploratory form the basic
activities within W3C have also been building blocks of
extensive under the Semantic Web Advanced a system that could support the vision of a Web
Development programme , and the Semantic Web imbued with meaning. The Semantic Web has been
Advanced Development in Europe project [65], developing a layered architecture, which is often
sponsored by the European Commission. The work represented using a diagram first proposed by Tim
is continuing within two recently constituted groups. Berners-Lee, with many variations since. Figure 1
The Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment gives a typical representation of this diagram.
Working Group seeks to support and extend the
practical application of the Semantic Web within a
number of fields, providing sample tools and While necessarily a simplification which has to be
general descriptive vocabularies in key areas. The used with some caution, it nevertheless gives a
RDF Data Access Working Group is developing reasonable conceptualisation of the various
languages for querying and processing semantic components of the Semantic Web. We describe
annotations across the Web. Initial work is taking briefly these layers.
place on the reasoning tools, which will greatly
enhance the level of power of Semantic Web agents. Unicode and URI:

Beyond the W3C, the programme has Unicode, the standard for computer character
taken on a life of its own. A large number of representation, and URIs, the standard for
researchers are now exploring how to take best identifying and locating resources (such as pages
advantage of the technology. It has the attraction of on the Web), provide a baseline for representing
combining the distributed nature of the Web with characters used in most of the languages in the
the power of semantic description, logic and world, and for identifying resources.
reasoning. There are many projects within the UK • XML:
and sponsored by the European Commission, as
well as in the US and the rest of the world. The total XML and its related standards, such as
investment in the Semantic Web world-wide has Namespaces, and Schemas, form a common means

9
for structuring data on the Web but without work is enormous. The basic layers of the Semantic
communicating the meaning of the data. These are Web are in place, and the following
well established within the Web already. recommendations were released by the W3C on
10th February 2004, covering the RDF, RDF Schema
Resource Description Framework:
and Ontology layers. • RDF/XML Syntax
RDF is the first layer of the Semantic Web proper. Specification (Revised) • RDF Vocabulary
RDF is a simple metadata representation framework, Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema . • RDF
using URIs to identify Web-based resources and a Primer • Resource Description Framework (RDF):
Concepts and Abstract Syntax • RDF Semantics •
graph model for describing relationships between RDF Test Cases • Web Ontology Language (OWL)
resources. Several syntactic representations are Use Cases and Requirements • OWL Web Ontology
available, including a standard XML format. RDF Language Reference • OWL Web Ontology Language
Schema: a simple type modelling language for Semantics and Abstract Syntax • OWL Web
describing classes of resources and properties Ontology Language Overview • OWL Web Ontology
between them in the basic RDF model. It provides a Language Test Cases • OWL Web Ontology
simple reasoning framework for inferring types of Language Guide Progress on the rule and reasoning
resources. • • • • Ontologies: a richer language for layer of the Semantic Web has been slower, with
providing more complex constraints on the types of many proposals varying from simple queries to
resources and their properties. Logic and Proof: an modal logic theorem provers. This is still an active
(automatic) reasoning system provided on top of research area, and we would anticipate that several
the ontology structure to make new inferences. approaches will emerge that are suitable for
Thus, using such a system, a software agent can different purposes. Recently, there have been initial
make deductions as to whether a particular proposals to provide standardised languages for the
resource satisfies its requirements (and vice versa). querying of RDF data, called SPARQL . There have
Trust: The final layer of the stack addresses issues also been experiments with rule languages, such as
of trust that the Semantic Web can support. This RuleML and CWM . These are demonstration
component has not progressed far beyond a vision applications to illustrate the value of reasoning, but
of allowing people to ask questions of the they have not been widely adopted, nor do they
trustworthiness of the information on the Web, in approach standardization. This is now beginning
order to provide an assurance of its quality. We do with the emergence of a language for rules and
not go into the details of these languages here. For reasoning called SWRL . However, there is some
an introduction see particularly the primer and way to go until there is greater consensus on the
guideline material or one of the books which are best approaches and required functionality of
appearing, for example . The Semantic Web reasoning tools. Large numbers of development
initiative has an ambitious programme to bring tools, program libraries and environments have
existing work on knowledge representation and emerged to support the development of the WWW.
reasoning to bear on the Web. These concepts were For a comprehensive list of development tools as
traditionally developed within the Artificial well as links to a wealth of other information on the
Intelligence community, and this has given the Semantic Web, see Dave Beckett’s Resource Guide .
impression that the activity is of largely academic
interest. A common misconception is that it is an Applications of RDF are emerging, including Dublin
attempt to bring AI to the Web. However, the Core , RDF Site Summary , Composite
Semantic Web has a less ambitious and more Capability/Preferences Profiles , and proposals for
immediately realisable goal of making the Web the Protocol for Internet Content Selection and
machine processable, making it in practice more Protocol for Privacy Preferences Project . These are
like database and information systems applications that are ideal for the Semantic Web as
management, but extended to the database of the they describe properties of Web-based resources.
whole Web. The application and potential of this Nevertheless, each individually could be described
10
using some domain-specific method, and possibly to other, related pieces' A user can load RDF
in a more succinct manner. The benefit comes annotations from other websites, and also
when they are merged together – then a 'network catalogue information from his or her own file-store
effect' can take place, with emergent properties or e-mail accounts. The structured searches can be
appearing. This is perhaps the key advantage of the made based on this annotation, and links between
approach. In this report we concentrate on the information can be created and presented based on
application projects of interest to the general user in the connections between resources embodied in the
the Higher and Further Education sector. Further, we RDF. Figure 2 gives a typical view of Haystack in
shall concentrate on tools which use the RDF/RDF practice. The Magpie Semantic Web filter takes an
Schema layers of the model; using Ontologies is alternative approach, providing a plugin which can
covered in a previous report within the JISC be added to a standard Web browser such as
Technology and Standards Watch series [78]. With Internet Explorer . This uses an ontology
the emergence of ontologies and, in the future, representing some area of shared interest, such as
reasoning tools, we can expect the full vision to be academic life. The ontology is then used to
delivered. However, we can achieve a good deal with 'semantically markup' webpages on the fly,
the tools available now. 3. IMPACT ON HE AND FE It recognizing key terms from the ontology, and then
is difficult to predict where the Semantic Web will provides a series of 'semantic links' from that page.
affect the Higher and Further Education sector as it Thus on recognizing that a term in a webpage
is not yet clear where the major impact of the describes a project (such as 'Magpie'), it can provide
Semantic Web will be in general. However, there are links to such related categories such as what the
four clear areas where there could be major project is about, who is working on the project, and
implications for both teaching and research: in publications arising from the project. Semantic Web
information management; in digital libraries; in servers such as Joseki from HP Labs in Bristol
support for interaction between virtual communities provide the other side of the Web architecture,
and collaborations; and in e-learning methods and allowing RDF annotations of resources to be
tools. 3.1 Information Management and Discovery published onto the Web. Such tools allow querying
Tools Perhaps the most widely developed space at and manipulation of RDF across the Web. Whilst a
the moment within the Semantic Web is in vital part of the Semantic Web infrastructure, such
information management, i.e. the organisation and tools currently require a lot of technical knowledge
discovery of information. This is the primary to be used effectively. The other most widely used
motivation behind the Semantic Web’s development, tools on the Web, as far as a user’s experience is
but people are taking a variety of approaches to concerned, are search engines, with Google today
developing tools to extend the current Web into a being the most popular. Semantic Web search
true Semantic Web. These tools typically take an engines such as Swoogle [ are under development.
existing Web component we are familiar with, such Swoogle can use ontologies to refine the search,
as browsers, servers and search engines, and and has harvested the existing ontologies and RDF
augment them with the power to process the data available on the Web. As yet there is a long way
semantic annotations associated with webpages. to go to make such tools intuitive to the general
Semantic Web Browsers, for example, extend the user, but in the future we can reasonably expect
notion of the Web browser into the Semantic Web powerful
by allowing the RDF annotations of resources to be
read and presented in a structured manner. For
example, the Haystack Web-browser from MIT :
'aggregates RDF from multiple arbitrary locations
and presents it to the user in a humanreadable
fashion, with point and click semantics that let the
user navigate from one piece of Semantic Web data

11
extensions to general search engines. researchers for reference and for research. And they
are increasingly converting themselves to Digital
Perhaps a more practical approach at this stage is
Libraries. A key aspect for the Digital Library is the
the provision of 'Semantic Portals', including SEAL,
provision of shared catalogues which can be
Ontoweaver and SWED , which have been used to
published and browsed. This requires the use of
deliver websites such as Knowledge Web . These
common metadata to describe the fields of the
portals use the organisation provided by annotating
catalogue (such as author, title, date, publisher), and
webpages using ontologies, to structure and display
common controlled vocabularies to allow subject
the information. The relationships embodied within
identifiers to be assigned to publications. By
the semantic structures can be used to provide a
publishing controlled vocabularies in one place,
richer and more precise search method, for example
which can then be accessed by all users across the
to find projects working in a specific topic area.
Web, library catalogues can use the same Web-
When information is then discovered and inspected,
accessible vocabularies for cataloguing, marking up
the portal can present other relevant information via
items with the most relevant terms for the domain
links which are categorized by the relationships
of interest. Then, search engines can use the same
between resources. Taken together, these
vocabularies in their search to ensure that the most
information management tools provide a prototype
relevant items of information are returned. The
of the basic infrastructure which will underlie the
Semantic Web opens up the possibility to take such
Web. They provide the user with an enhanced
an approach. It offers open standards that can
information management capacity, with the means
enable vendor-neutral solutions, with a useful
to organise and structure the chaotic information on
flexibility (allowing structured and semi-structured
the Web. By providing the annotation in a machine
data, formal and informal descriptions, and an open
readable format, user agent software can access
and extensible architecture) and it helps to support
and process that information automatically. Further,
decentralized solutions where that is appropriate.
they can also annotate information in local file
Thus RDF can be used as a common interchange
stores, e-mail and intranets, providing an economic
format for catalogue metadata and shared
means of improving the information infrastructure
vocabulary, which can be used by all libraries and
within organisations. Consequently, it is likely that it
search engines across the Web. 3.2.1 Metadata
is within organisations and collaborations where the
Metadata is a key component of the provision of
annotation can be effectively controlled that the
online catalogues that are searchable across the
largest initial impact of the Semantic Web will be
Web. In order to use the Semantic Web to its best
felt. HE and FE colleges could well be in the
effect, metadata needs to be published in RDF
forefront of such developments, as they often have
formats. There are several initiatives involved with
a pool of motivated and technologically aware users.
defining metadata standards in the library and
3.2 Semantic Web and Digital Libraries Libraries are publishing community, including: • Dublin Core
a key Metadata Initiative which provides a standard set of
machine readable fields and guidelines for their use.
This now has a well-established RDF vocabulary •
MARC. The well known MARC format from the
Library of Congress has an XML representation •
ONIX. The ONIX for Books Product Information
Message is the international standard for
representing and communicating book industry
product information in electronic form XML
representation • PRISM. The Publishing
component of the information infrastructure which Requirements for Industry Standard Metadata
underpins Further and Higher Education. They specification defines an XML metadata vocabulary
provide an essential resource for students and
12
for magazine, news, catalogue, book, and journal communities individuals can publish information
content . Such standards can be used across the about themselves, their interests and their work, and
Web in that they provide a common metadata allow other like-minded individuals to discover and
vocabulary in XML or RDF which can be used to share that information in order to build a virtual
mark up and share library catalogues on the Web. community of people sharing ideas. The 'Friend of a
PRISM and Dublin Core are usable now in the Friend' or FOAF project provides a simple language
Semantic Web. MARC and ONIX require further work, that allows people to publish information about
but could be used as a source to enrich the themselves, their work and interests, along with
metadata provided on the Web. 3.2.2 Controlled their contact details (with due respect to privacy).
Vocabulary Controlled vocabularies such as This is useful, but becomes interesting when people
classifications, taxonomies and thesauri are the can also publish links to others they know in the
other key components for cataloguing and community. Taken together, FOAF provides a
searching by classifying documents by subject. network of links between people. You can trace the
Developing tools and formats for representing and extent and scope of the virtual community of
delivering such thesauri on the Semantic Web has individuals, discovering new potential contacts and
been a major initiative of the SWAD-Europe project . adjacent communities of interest. People are taking
This provides a set of standard formats and tools up this idea to build tools, such as FOAFNaut, which
for describing controlled vocabularies and allow you to explore the connections between
classifications called the Simple Knowledge communities . Thus we have an example of a
Organisation System (SKOS). It also provides some network effect within the Semantic Web when
sample thesauri which use these formats, and some simple tools and small amounts of information
demonstration software to allow people and combine to form something of greater value. Other
programs to browse and select terms from a tools are designed to allow communities to share
thesaurus across the Web. This work is now being information and opinion. Web-logs (or blogs) are
taken up by the W3C Semantic Web Best Practices well-established outside the Semantic Web, allowing
and Deployment Working Group in their Thesaurus people to publish onto the Web and others to
Taskforce. comment. By bringing blogs into the Semantic Web,
with annotation, they can be included within
3.2.3 Other projects There are many other projects
Semantic Web information harvesting, combination
and initiatives which are providing access to
and searching, so they can be shared in a more
libraries across the Web, some of which are using
directed fashion. An example of this is the work on
the Semantic Web directly, others behind the scenes.
Semantic Blogging from HP Labs in Bristol, where
Some important ones include: The Open Archive
blogs are annotated so that information on
Initiative , which is providing direct access to
bibliographies and reading lists can be shared,
structured metadata via its metadata harvesting
searched and discussed . Potentially, this provides
protocol; the Simile Project, which is using the
an invaluable shared resource of annotated
Semantic Web to enhance interoperability among
reference materials for a community, such as a
digital assets, schemata/vocabularies/ontologies,
group of researchers or students. Similarly, tools
metadata, and services; and DELOS, a European
such as Annotea use annotation in RDF to provide
Network of Excellence on Digital Libraries whose
comments and annotations on webpages, so that
website provides many more links to Digital Library
comments provided by the community lead to
projects . 3.3 Supporting interaction A major theme
discussion . Similarly, the Web-based news-
that has emerged during the development of the
syndication system RSS (for either Rich Syndication
Semantic Web is the ability to support interaction
System, or RDF Syndication System), provides a
between groups of people across the Web. This has
mechanism for publishing, sharing, combining,
two aspects: support for virtual communities and
annotating and searching news lists and discussion
support for virtual organisations. 3.3.1 Semantic
groups , and some versions of RSS use RDF,
Web in Virtual Communities Within virtual
13
including RSS 1.0. As an example, RSS is being used those tools which form a familiar part of the current
by the Nature Publishing Group to keep scientists Web so that they can become useful information
and librarians informed of the latest news from their management tools in their own right. The Web is
journals, using a combination of Dublin Core and already an information source of choice for many
Prism metadata . Community portals provide central learners and researchers. A more structured and
points where virtual communities can communicate directed approach to managing this information
and share information, find new contacts and space, both within institutions and across the whole
comment on each other’s work. Semantic Web community, can make this information more useful,
technology is being used to construct such portals with less wasted effort, and more capacity to
to provide a richer approach to organising and measure the quality of information. By making the
searching community portals, typically built on top annotation machine readable, it becomes
of the Semantic Portal technology above. An accessible to automatic processing, carrying out
example is CSAktiveSpace from the University of many routine tasks which consume people’s time. A
Southampton which gathers together information further impact is likely to be in the business of
on the active researchers in Computer Science running education, allowing more efficient
within the UK, categorising their research topics and information flow around institutions. - Digital
rating them on output. This tool provides a rich Libraries: the impact on digital libraries, combined
interface allowing the user to explore the Computer with the Open Access Initiative and the rise of open
Science community within the UK from different archiving is likely to be quite profound. Libraries
angles, including some unusual search interfaces become 'value-added' information annotators and
allowing geographical searches, such as finding collators rather than the archivists of externally
experts on Neural Networks working in Scotland. published literature and the holders of the published
output of institutions. The Semantic Web, although
Another approach to community portals is provided
not a prerequisite or a motivator for this change is
by the Semantic Web Environmental Directory
nevertheless likely to smooth its development. The
(SWED) also from HP Labs in Bristol . This portal
tools are in place for sharing classification schemes
brings together information about environmental
and to allow the community to develop, deepen and
organisations in the UK, large and small, from the
share such schemes. The information infrastructure
RSPB to local wildlife observation groups, which
tools discussed above will have particular impact on
again can be searched in a structured manner, so
the way students and researchers find information,
that users can rapidly identify the groups which
so these tools may typically be provided and
most closely match their requirements. An
adapted by libraries who will tailor them to the
interesting feature of the design of this system is
needs of their own users. The Semantic Web, like
that rather than being managed centrally, each
the current Web, has the capacity of being an
organisation is responsible for entering and
overwhelming place; libraries are well-placed to
maintaining its own information in a distributed
make sense of this for the HE and FE community. -
fashion which is then aggregated together. As each
Building communities and collaborations: a major
organisation has a vested interest in keeping the
impact is likely to occur in the way that academic
information up to date, there is a greater chance
communities work together. The tools for forming
that the portal will remain current with little effort on
virtual communities and sharing information across
the part of the central host. Summary of impact
that community are simple and lightweight, and, if
areas We have discussed four areas where the
the development of blogs and the use of RSS is an
Semantic Web is most likely to make an impact:
indication, can enhance the interaction of an
information management, digital libraries, virtual
interested community by an enormous amount.
communities, and e-learning.
Providing a richer annotation structure to these can
To summarise: - Information Management: only enhance their usefulness, bringing them into
the information infrastructure as well as providing a
The Semantic Web enhances the capabilities of
14
means of communication to people across the [last accessed 25/04/05]
world. Support for virtual collaborations is a much
[7]. T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila (2001).
larger issue, as it requires tighter control over
The Semantic Web. Scientific American. Available at:
resources and security. This is largely taking place
http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=
in the Grid community and efforts to construct a
00048144-10D2-1C70-84A9809EC588EF21 [last
Semantic Grid are already well underway, bringing
accessed 25/04/05] [8].
the machine readable annotation to automate the
discovery and negotiation of services onto the Grid. [9]. Business Process Execution Language for Web
− E-Learning: all of the above can influence e- Services (BPEL4WS) homepage:
learning. However, we should also consider http://www128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws
specifically, support for the presentation and -bpel/ [last accessed 25/04/05] J. Bradshaw et al.
delivery of course materials and for assisting and (2003). Representation and reasoning about DAML-
assessing students. Again, the impact of the based policy and domain services in KAoS. In: J.
Semantic Web is likely to mean that these can be Rosenschein, M. Wooldridge, Proc. of the 2nd Int.
more closely tailored to the needs of the user, with a Joint Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent
choice of learning objects mediated through Systems. ACM Press, pp. 835–842. [10].
selection mechanisms. The Semantic Web can
provide context and co-ordination, with workflow [11]. D. Brickley and R.V. Guha (2000). RDF
tools providing a supporting infrastructure. Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema.
W3C Candidate recommendation, 27th March 2000.
REFERENCES Available at: http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-
rdfschema-20000327/ [last accessed 25/04/05] D.
[1]. Annotea project homepage:
Brickley and R.V. Guha (2004). RDF Vocabulary
http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea/ [last accessed
Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. W3C
25/04/05]
Recommendation 10th February 2004. Available at:
[2]. G. Antoniou, F. van Harmelen (2004). A http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/ [last accessed
Semantic Web Primer. MIT Press 25/04/05]

. [3]. G. Beged-Dov et al. (2000). RDF Site Summary [12]. D. Brickley and R. Swick (2000). PICS Ratings
(RSS) 1.0. Available from: Vocabularies in XML/RDF. W3C Note 27th March
http://purl.org/rss/1.0/spec [last accessed 2000. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-pics [last accessed
25/04/05] Dave Beckett (2004). RDF/XML Syntax 25/04/05] [13]. D. Brickley, S. Buswell, B. Matthews,
Specification (Revised). W3C Recommendation 10th L. Miller, D. Reynolds, M. Wilson (2002). SWAD-
February 2004. Available at: Europe: Semantic Web Advanced Development in
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ [last Europe. Presented at the 1st International Semantic
accessed 25/04/05] [4]. Web Conference.

[5]. Dave Beckett's Resource Description Framework [14]. [15]. V. Bush (1945). As We May Think. The
(RDF) Resource Guide: available at: Atlantic Monthly, reproduced at
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/rdf/resources/ http://www.ps.unisb.de/~duchier/pub/vbush/vbush
[last accessed 25/04/05] T. Berners-Lee (1989). -all.shtml [last accessed 25/04/05] J. Carroll, J. De
Information Management: A Proposal. CERN. Roo (2004). OWL Web Ontology Language Test
Available at: Cases. W3C Recommendation 10th February 2004.
http://www.w3.org/History/1989/proposal.html Available at: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/ [last
[last accessed 25/04/05] accessed 25/04/05]

[6]. T. Berners-Lee (1998). Semantic Web Road Map.

W3C. Available at:
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html

15
 SEMANTIC WEB
The
proposed
development of
world wide web.

16
 N. Hema Harika

21311A6960

CSE IOT

CONTENTS:

 What is Semantic web

 Semantic Web
 Why is web 2.0
 Why we use
alternative for 2.0
web
 Why Semantic web
 Components of
Semantic web
 Advantages
 Disadvantages
 Conclusion
17
 What Is Semantic Web:

Web is a system of interlinked documents

accessed via internet
Semantic is related to syntax but Syntax is
how to say something and semantic is the
meaning behind what we say.

What is “Semantic web”?

18
 What is Web
2.0

A web 2.0 is a world wide

web website that allows
users to interact and
collaborate with each other
through social media
dialogue as creaters of user
-generated content in a
virtual community.

19
 Why we use Alternative
for 2.0 Web

 In web 2.0, web pages are written in

HTML.
 HTML describes the syntax but not the
semantics.
 If the computer can understand the
meaning behind information.
 .....They can learn what we are
interested in
 .....They can find us better find
what we want
 This is really what the semantic web is
all about.

20
 SEMANTIC WEB :
 It is a major research initiative
of the ‘world wide web’ to
create a metadata.
 Semantic means the study of
the meaning.
 It’s an extension of the current
web in which information is
given well-defined meaning .

21
22
 WHY SEMANTIC
WEB ?
In the semantic Web,
Metadata are invisible as
people read the page , but
they’re clearly visible to
computers .
Metadata are simply
machine- readable data that
describe other data.
Metadata can also allow
more complex , focused
Web searches with more
accurate results.

23
Components of semantic
web :

XML(Extensible Markup
Language)
RDF
Ontologies

24
XML
The extensible Markup
language is a general-
purpose markup language
It is designed to describe
structured documents.
XML is based on tags like
HTML
It allows users to define
their own tags.
Unlike HTML, the XML tags
have no specific semantics.

25
 RDF
 RDF stands for Resource
Description Framework
 RDF is a data model of the
Semantic web.
 If you store Semantic Web
data, it’s in RDF.

26
 Ontology

Ontology means
describing the semantics
of the data.
Providing a uniform way
to enable communication
by which different parties
can understand each
other.

27
 Advantages :
Improves business-
business communication.
Assist human users in their
day -to-day online activities.
Improves knowledge
management.
Automate tasking.
Maximize customer value
and profits.

28
 Disadvantages:
Cost
Security
Semantic precisions

29
 Conclusion :

Semantic web is an initiative

that aims at improving the
current state of the world
wide web.

30
 😊
Thank
you

31
References:
IEEE Internet Computing The Semantic Web: The Roles of XML
and RDF

 Stefan Decker And Sergey Melnik Stanford

University

• IEEE INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS Ontology Languages for the

Semantic Web

 Asunción Gómez-Pérez and Oscar Corcho,

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid • IEEE Published by the IEEE
Computer Society:

 Semantics Scales Up Beyond Search in Web 3.0

 Amit Sheth

• Kno.e.sis, Wright State University

 November/December 2011

• T. Berners-Lee. Semantic Web Road Map

.  www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic

• www.semanticweb.org

• www.wikipedia.org

32