A Crowd Sourcing \/ Search v.s Browse groups<\/p>\n
B Localization of IS Standards to the humanistic discipline\u2014networked ontologies<\/p>\n
C Groups\u2014relationships\/ biographical data<\/p>\n
D Crosswalks across time\/ culture<\/p>\n
E Scholarly and reusable resources<\/p>\n
F Objects<\/p>\n
Crosswalk or merge? Merging requires deduplication.<\/p>\n
Factors that determine type and possibility of crosswalk: granularity, hierarchy, cultural- or dataset-specific features; changing meaning over time. Inevitably \u201cdumb down\u201d from more to less granular. Definition: overarching structure layered on top of project, does not define scope of project.<\/p>\n
Types (do these in order):<\/p>\n
Translation\/transcoding: concept goes by different names, e.g., \u201cI\u201d, \u201cuno\u201d, \u201c1\u201d. \u201caristocracy\u201d ?= \u201cnobility\u201d; \u201celite\u201d = \u201cgentry\u201d. (Granularity, e.g., gardener, botanist, farmer, agriculturalist, etc., isn\u2019t a cross-walk issue; it\u2019s broader ~ narrower term.) Same term may have different meanings in different times, e.g., printer<\/em> in Samuel Johnson\u2019s time is a publisher and bookseller. This is about equality: find as many correspondences as possible.<\/p>\n Merging: Or perhaps granularity is a type of merging, e.g., merging granular terms for agricultural workers into a single farmer\/gardener umbrella topic. Add together the stuff you couldn\u2019t merge. E.g., \u201cthere\u2019s no English counterpart to Huguenot, so add the category or merge into \u2018religious minority\u2019.\u201d New umbrella category.<\/p>\n Union vs intersection: (A, B, C) + (B, C, D) might yield (A, B, C, D) or (B, C). Coexisting systems: date systems?<\/p>\n Crosswalk: relationships or implementation? How about: best practices for creating reusable ontology?<\/p>\n No Ur-ontology, only the ability to translate from one to another. OR (rephrased): Is there no ur-onotology (through plurality\/collection of specific project ontologies)?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Elisa\u2019s incomplete notes on group collective discussions:<\/p>\n Objects:\u00a0\u00a0 How can we interlace layers of descriptive structures for objects?<\/p>\n If you make a category infinitely reusable, it\u2019s not practically helpful for specific things. Example of a book in thing theory (many distinct manifestations)<\/p>\n Chris Warren: Guiding principles: LAYERING and EXTENSIBILITY<\/p>\n Aaron adds; MODULARITY\u00a0 — suggests that FOAF is used in a modular way: use the structure of it\u2026<\/p>\n RDF:\u00a0 subject-predicate-object\u00a0 structure<\/p>\n VIAF ids can be scraped from their API\u00a0 (Is it this? http:\/\/api-portal.anypoint.mulesoft.com\/oclc\/api\/oclc-viaf-api<\/a>)<\/p>\n How to fine-tune\/check group definitions: Poisson Graphical lasso: network stats to infer relationships within a group\u2014This has \u201ctweakable coefficients\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Breakout Groups: A Crowd Sourcing \/ Search v.s Browse groups B Localization of IS Standards to the humanistic discipline\u2014networked ontologies C Groups\u2014relationships\/ biographical data D Crosswalks across time\/ culture E Scholarly and reusable resources F Objects Crosswalk Breakout Group Crosswalk or merge? Merging requires deduplication. Factors that determine type and possibility of crosswalk: granularity, hierarchy, cultural- or dataset-specific features; changing…<\/p>\n
\nD-Dupe: to help identify duplicate (or potentially duplicate) nodes http:\/\/linqs.cs.umd.edu\/projects\/ddupe\/<\/a><\/p>\n