Jeremy J. Carroll
ABSTRACT
The Semantic Web consists of many RDF graphs nameable by URIs. This paper extends the syntax and semantics of RDF to cover such Named Graphs. This enables RDF statements that describe graphs, which is beneficial in many Semantic Web application areas. As a case study, we explore the application area of Semantic Web publishing: Named Graphs allow publishers to communicate assertional intent, and to sign their graphs; information consumers can evaluate specific graphs using task-specific trust policies, and act on information from those Named Graphs that they accept. Graphs are trusted depending on: their content; information about the graph; and the task the user is performing. The extension of RDF to Named Graphs provides a formally defined framework to be a foundation for the Semantic Web trust layer.
- R. Agrawal, P. Domingos, and M. Richardson. Trust Management for the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the 2nd ISWC, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- J. L. Austin. How to do things with words. Harvard University Press, 1962.]]Google Scholar
- D. Beckett. Redland Notes - Contexts. http://www.redland.opensource.ac.uk/notes/contexts.html, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- D. Beckett. RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised). http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- D. Beckett. Turtle - Terse RDF Triple Language. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/2004/01/turtle/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- T. Berners-Lee. Notation 3. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3, 1998.]]Google Scholar
- C. Bizer. Semantic Web Trust and Security Resource Guide. http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/SWTSGuide, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- C. Bizer. TriQL - A Query Language for Named Graphs. http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/TriQL/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- C. Bizer. TriQL.P - A Query Language for Querying Named Graphs Published by Untrustworthy Sources. http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/triqlp/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- C. Bizer and R. Cyganiak. Ng4j - named graphs api for jena. http://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/ng4j/, 2005.]]Google Scholar
- C. Bizer and R. Oldakowski. Using Context- and Content-Based Trust Policies on the Semantic Web. In 13th World Wide Web Conference, WWW2004 (Poster), 2004.]] Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Brickley and R. V. Guha. RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- J. J. Carroll. Signing RDF Graphs. In 2nd ISWC, volume 2870 of LNCS. Springer, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- J. J. Carroll and J. De Roo. Web Ontology Language (OWL) Test Cases. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- J. J. Carroll, I. Dickinson, C. Dollin, D. Reynolds, A. Seaborne, and K. Wilkinson. Jena: Implementing the Semantic Web Recommendations. In 13th World Wide Web Conference, WWW2004, 2004.]] Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. J. Carroll and P. Stickler. TriX: RDF Triples in XML. Technical Report HPL-2003-268, HP Labs, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- C. Catton and D. Shotton. The use of Named Graphs to enable ontology evolution. http://www.bioimage.org/pub/paradigm.htm, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- Creative Commons Website. http://creativecommons.org/, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- M. Dean and G. Schreiber. OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- E. Dumbill. Tracking Provenance of RDF Data. Technical report, ISO/IEC, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- D. Eastlake, J. Reagle, and D. Solo. XML-Signature Syntax and Processing, RFC 3275. http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/, 2002.]]Google Scholar
- E. Feigenbaum. Keynote. In International Semantic Web Conference, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- A. Gangemi and P. Mika. Understanding the semantic web through descriptions and situations. In Proceedings of DOA/CoopIS/ODBASE 2003 Confederated International Conferences DOA, CoopIS and ODBASE, LNCS. Springer, 2003.]]Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Golbeck, B. Parsia, and J. Hendler. Trust Networks on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Cooperative Intelligent Agents, CIA2003, 2003.]]Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. V. Guha. Contexts: A Formalization and Some Applications. PhD thesis, Stanford, 1995.]] Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Hayes. RDF Semantics. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- A. Ibrahim. Agent Communication Languages (ACL). http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~ibrahim/publications/acl.htm, 2000.]]Google Scholar
- Intellidimension. RDF Gateway - Database Fundamentals. http://www.intellidimension.com/pages/rdfgateway/dev-guide/db/db.rsp, 2003.]]Google Scholar
- ITU-T. The Directory -- Models X.501, 1993.]]Google Scholar
- ITU-T. Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory Authentication Framework. X.509, 1997.]]Google Scholar
- G. Klyne. Circumstance, provenance and partial knowledge. http://www.ninebynine.org/RDFNotes/UsingContextsWithRDF.html, 2002.]]Google Scholar
- G. Klyne and J. J. Carroll. Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- R. MacGregor and I.-Y. Ko. Representing Contextualized Data using Semantic Web Tools. In Practical and Scalable Semantic Systems (workshop at 2nd ISWC), 2003.]]Google Scholar
- M. Marchiori. The platform for privacy preferences. http://www.w3.org/TR/P3P/, 2002.]]Google Scholar
- P. F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, and I. Horrocks. OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- E. Prud'hommeaux and A. Seaborne. SPARQL Query Language for RDF. http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050217/, Feb 2005.]]Google Scholar
- R. M. R. Guha and R. Fikes. Contexts for the semantic web. In Proceedings of ISWC'2004, 2004.]]Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Reynolds, P. Shabajee, S. Cayzer, and D. Steer. Semantic portals demonstrator - lessons learnt. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/demo_2_report/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- A. Seaborne. RDQL - A Query Language for RDF. http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-RDQL-20040109, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- M. Sintek and S. Decker. Triple - a query, inference, and transformation language for the semantic web. In Proceedings of ISWC'2002, pages 364--378, 2002.]] Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. K. Smith, C. Welty, and D. L. McGuinness. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- P. Stickler. RDFQ. http://sw.nokia.com/rdfq/RDFQ.html, 2004.]]Google Scholar
- M. Wahl, S. Kille, and T. Howes. Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): UTF-8 String Representation of Distinguished Names, RFC 2253, 1997.]] Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Zimmerman and Network Associates Inc. An Introduction to Cryptography. ftp://ftp.pgpi.org/pub/pgp/6.5/docs/english/IntroToCrypto.pdf, 1999.]]Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Named graphs, provenance and trust
Recommendations
Don't like RDF reification?: making statements about statements using singleton property
WWW '14: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World wide webStatements about RDF statements, or meta triples, provide additional information about individual triples, such as the source, the occurring time or place, or the certainty. Integrating such meta triples into semantic knowledge bases would enable the ...
Named graphs
The Semantic Web consists of many RDF graphs nameable by URIs. This paper extends the syntax and semantics of RDF to cover such named graphs. This enables RDF statements that describe graphs, which is beneficial in many Semantic Web application areas. ...
Dynamic provenance for SPARQL updates using named graphs
WWW '14 Companion: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide WebWhile the (Semantic) Web currently does have a way to exhibit static provenance information in the W3C PROV standards, the Web does not have a way to describe dynamic changes to data. While some provenance models and annotation techniques originally ...
Comments