2007
DOI: 10.1504/ijkl.2007.016709
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

From folksonomies to ontologies: employing wisdom of the crowds to serve learning purposes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is also a debate over whether the driving force behind Web 3.0 will be intelligent systems, or whether intelligence will emerge in a more organic way, such as via collaborative filtering services like Del.icio.us, Flickr and Digg that extract meaning and order from the existing web and from how people interact with it (Markoff, 2006;Lux and Dosinger, 2007). Those linguistic mechanisms for instance could normalise folksonomy tags arbitrarily defined by the users to their roots.…”
Section: Silent Conversion Of the Folksonomies Into More Complex Kosmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is also a debate over whether the driving force behind Web 3.0 will be intelligent systems, or whether intelligence will emerge in a more organic way, such as via collaborative filtering services like Del.icio.us, Flickr and Digg that extract meaning and order from the existing web and from how people interact with it (Markoff, 2006;Lux and Dosinger, 2007). Those linguistic mechanisms for instance could normalise folksonomy tags arbitrarily defined by the users to their roots.…”
Section: Silent Conversion Of the Folksonomies Into More Complex Kosmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Shadbolt, Hall, and Berners Lee (2006), folksonomies have been claimed to be an interesting emergent attempt for infor mation retrieval but serve different purposes to ontologies, the lat ter are attempts to more carefully define parts of the data world and to allow mappings and interactions between data held in dif ferent formats. In this scenario folskonomies had been used for cre ating semantic metadata (Al Khalifa & Davis, 2007) or as a support to learning (Lux & Dosinger, 2007). Hence, ontologies are defined through a careful, explicit process that attempts to remove ambi guity, whereas the definition of a tag is a loose and implicit process where ambiguity might well remain.…”
Section: Using Callimachusdlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [22], folksonomies have been claimed to be an interesting emergent attempt for information retrieval but serve different purposes to ontologies, the latter are attempts to more carefully define parts of the data world and to allow mappings and interactions between data held in different formats. In this scenario folskonomies had been used for creating semantic metadata [23] or as a support to learning [24]. Hence, ontologies are defined through a careful, explicit process that attempts to remove ambiguity, whereas the definition of a tag is a loose and implicit process where ambiguity might well remain.…”
Section: Using Callimachusdlmentioning
confidence: 99%