Tools for the automatic generation of ontology documentation: A task-based evaluation

International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 21-44

  Peroni, Silvio ^a   Shotton, David ^b   Vitali, Fabio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Live OWL documentation environment; Online tools; Ontology; Ontology browser; Ontology documentation; Parrot; Task based comparison; Usability analysis; User testing; Web ontology language (OWL); Webprot g

Indexed keywords

LIVE OWL DOCUMENTATION ENVIRONMENT; ON-LINE TOOLS; ONTOLOGY DOCUMENTATIONS; PARROT; TASK-BASED; USABILITY ANALYSIS; USER TESTING; WEB ONTOLOGY LANGUAGE;

ONTOLOGY; TOOLS;

BIRDS;

EID: 84880397286     PISSN: 15526283     EISSN: 15526291     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jswis.2013010102     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Basca, C., Corlosquet, S., Cyganiak, R., Fernández, S., & Schandl, T. (2008). Neologism: Easy vocabulary publishing. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Scripting for the Semantic Web. Aachen, Germany: SunSITE Central Europe. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-368/ paper10.pdf
2. Boley, H., Hallmark, G., Kifer, M., Paschke, A., Polleres, A., & Reynolds, D. (2010). RIF core dialect. W3C Recommendation, 22 June 2010. World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://www.w3.org/TR/rif- core/
3. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A "quick and dirty" usability scale. In Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189-194). London, UK: Taylor and Francis.
4. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (2010). DCMI metadata terms. DCMI Recommendation. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://dublincore.org/documents/ dcmi-terms/
5. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (2010). Dublin core metadata element set, Version 1.1. DCMI Recommendation. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/
6. Harris, S., & Seaborne, A. (2012). SPARQL 1.1 query language. W3C Proposed Recommendation, 08 November 2012. World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/
7. Horridge, M., & Patel-Schneider, P. (2009). OWL 2 web ontology language: Manchester syntax. W3C Working Group Note, 27 October 2009. World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2- manchester-syntax/
8. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., & Hendler, J. (2005). A tool for working with web ontologies. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 1(1), 36-49. doi:10.4018/jswis.2005010103.
9. Knublauch, H., Horridge, M., Musen, M. A., Rector, A. L., Stevens, R., & Drummond, N. Wang, H. (2005). The protégé OWL experience. In Proceedings of the OWLED 05 Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions. Aachen, Germany: SunSITE Central Europe. Retrieved March 27, 2013, from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-188/sub14.pdf
10. Lewis, J. R., & Sauro, J. (2009). The factor structure of the system usability scale. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Human Centered Design (HCD09). Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642- 02806-9-12
11. Motta, E., Mulholland, P., Peroni, S., d'Aquin, M., Gomez-Perez, J. M., Mendez, V., & Zablith, F. (2011). A novel approach to visualizing and navigating ontologies. In Proceedings of the 10th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2011). Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-25073- 6-30
12. Paulheim, H., & Probst, F. (2010). Ontology-enhanced user interfaces: A survey. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 6(2), 36-59. doi:10.4018/jswis.2010040103.
13. Peroni, S., Motta, E., & d'Aquin, M. (2008). Identifying key concepts in an ontology, through the integration of cognitive principles with statistical and topological measures. In Domingue, J., & Anutariya, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Asian Semantic Web Conference (ASWC 2008) (pp. 242-256). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-89704-0-17
14. Peroni, S., & Shotton, D. (2012). FaBiO and CiTO: Ontologies for describing bibliographic resources and citations. Journal of Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 17, 33-43. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. doi: doi:10.1016/j.websem.2012.08.001.
15. Peroni, S., Shotton, D., & Vitali, F. (2012). Scholarly publishing and the Linked Data: Describing roles, statuses, temporal and contextual extents. In Presutti, V., Pinto, H. S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Semantic Systems (i-Semantics 2012) (pp. 9-16). New York, NY: ACM. doi: 10.1145/2362499.2362502
16. Peroni, S., Shotton, D., & Vitali, F. (2012). The live OWL documentation environment: A tool for the automatic generation of ontology documentation. In ten Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d'Aquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW 2012) (pp. 398-412). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2-35
17. Sauermann, L., & Cyganiak, R. (2008). Cool URIs for the semantic web. W3C Interest Group Note, 03 December 2008. World Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/
18. Sauro, J. (2011). A practical guide to the system usability scale: Background, benchmarks & best practices. ISBN: 978-1461062707
19. Sirin, E., Bulka, B., & Smith, M. (2010). Terp: Syntax for OWL-friendly SPARQL queries. In Sirin, E., Clark, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED 2010). Aachen, Germany: Sun SITE Central Europe. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-614/owled2010-submission-14.pdf
20. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage Publications.
21. Suárez-Figueroa, M. C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Motta, E., & Gangemi, A. (2012). Ontology engineering in a networked world. Berlin, Germany: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24794-1.
22. Tejo-Alonso, C., Berrueta, D., Polo, L., & Fernandez, S. (2011). Metadata for web ontologies and rules: current practices and perspectives. In Proceeding of the 5th Interational Conference on Metadata and Semantic Research (MTSR 2011). Berlin, Germany: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-24731-6-6
23. Tudorache, T., Nyulas, C., Noy, N. F., & Musen, M. A. (2010). WebProtégé: A collaborative ontology editor and knowledge acquisition tool for the web. In Semantic web - Interoperability, usability, applicability (Pre-press). doi: doi:10.3233/SW-2012-0057.
24. Tukey, J. W. (1953). The problem of multiple comparisons. In H. Braun (Ed.), The collected works of John W. Tukey VIII. Multiple comparisons: 1948-1983. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall.
25. Wang, T. D., & Parsia, B. (2006). Cropcircles: Topology sensitive visualization of OWL class hierarchies. In Cruz, I. F., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Aroyo, L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2006). Berlin, Germany: Springer. doi: 10.1007/11926078-50