2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-22002-4_2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Ontology for Historical Research Documents

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…it is mostly depending upon user of ontology. Domain Ontologies are constructed for Safety Risk identification to formalize the safety risk knowledge in metro construction [8], for historical documents [9], for university purpose [10].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…it is mostly depending upon user of ontology. Domain Ontologies are constructed for Safety Risk identification to formalize the safety risk knowledge in metro construction [8], for historical documents [9], for university purpose [10].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors aim to create a system capable to automate the ontological-based annotation process of texts from digital libraries. The work is based on the STOLE [31], an ontology-based digital library created from documents about the history of public administration in Italy in the 19th and 20th centuries. For annotation purposes, they considered classes from STOLE to perform the experiment, Article, Event, Institution, Legal System, and Person.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Øyvind Eide (2014) there are at least six methods to include ontologies into a TEI document using the <relation> element which allows enhancing descriptions by using RDF-OWL ontologies. Nevertheless is a sophisticated method that still needs to be tested, but the perspective of success will allow integrating into TEI documents vocabularies like FOAF, LKIF Core, Bio Vocabulary, and even experimental ontologies for historical documents (Adorni et al, 2015).…”
Section: Semantic Data Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%