Law, Governance and Technology

Wiesbaden : : Springer Fachmedien, , 2011.

1 online resource (314 p.)

Description based upon print version of record.. - Legal Ontology Engineering; Foreword; Preface; Contents; List of Figures; List of Tables; Acronyms; Chapter 1: Introduction; 1.1 Legal Knowledge Management; 1.2 Semantic Web Technologies and Applications; 1.2.1 Legal Ontologies for Legal Knowledge Representation; 1.2.2 Legal Experts for Legal Ontology Development; 1.3 Purpose and Contents of this Book; Chapter 2: On Ontologies; 2.1 Introduction; 2.2 Understanding Ontology; 2.2.1 What Is an Ontology?; 2.3 Types of Ontologies and Design Criteria; 2.3.1 Typology of Ontologies; 2.3.2 Other Design Criteria; 2.3.3 On Legal Ontologies. - 2.4 Some Conclusions: A Set of TypesChapter 3: Methodologies, Tools and Languages for Ontology Design; 3.1 Introduction; 3.2 Methodologies and Methods for Ontology Design; 3.2.1 Current Ontology Methodologies; 3.3 Languages and Tools for Ontology Modelling; 3.3.1 Representation Languages; 3.3.2 Ontology Modelling Tools and Environments; 3.3.2.1 Ontology Development Environments and Editors; 3.3.2.2 Ontology Learning Tools and Textual Analysis Tools; 3.3.2.3 Other Ontology Engineering Tools; 3.4 Conclusions and Some Thoughts on Expert Participation in Ontology Development. - 4.2.2.7 OCL.NL Ontology of Dutch Criminal Law4.2.2.8 Jur-(Ital)Wordnet (Jur-IWN) and Core Legal Ontology (CLO); 4.2.2.9 European VAT Regulatory Ontology: Topical Ontology of Fraud and Topical Ontology of VAT; 4.2.2.10 Lame's Ontology of French Law; 4.2.2.11 IPROnto (Intellectual Property Rights Ontology)and the Copyright Ontology; 4.2.2.12 Customer Complaint Ontology (CContology); 4.2.2.13 BEST Ontologies; 4.2.2.14 The Ontology of Professional Judicial Knowledge; 4.2.2.15 LKIF Core Ontology; 4.2.2.16 The Legal Case Ontology; 4.2.3 More Legal Ontologies; 4.3 Some Conclusions of the Analysis. - 5.2.4.2 Preliminary Validation by Legal Experts. - Chapter 4: Legal Ontologies4.1 A Review; 4.2 Existing Legal Ontologies; 4.2.1 Early Conceptualizations of the Legal Domain; 4.2.1.1 Hafner's Semantic Network of Legal Concepts; 4.2.1.2 McCarty's Language for Legal Discourse; 4.2.1.3 NORMA; 4.2.1.4 CABALA Semantic Network; 4.2.2 Legal Ontologies; 4.2.2.1 The Frame-Based Ontology of Law (FBO); 4.2.2.2 Functional Ontology of Law (FOLaw); 4.2.2.3 Ontology of Law as a Dynamic Interconnected System of States of Affairs; 4.2.2.4 CLIME Ontology; 4.2.2.5 Mommer's Knowledge-based Model of Law; 4.2.2.6 LRI-Core. - Chapter 5: Modelling Judicial Professional Knowledge: A Case Study5.1 The Ontology of Professional Judicial Knowledge; 5.2 Requirements and Knowledge Acquisition; 5.2.1 Initial Research and Ethnography; 5.2.2 Specification of Requirements; 5.2.2.1 IURISERVICE Requirements; 5.2.2.2 Ontology Requirements; 5.2.2.3 Methodological Requirements; 5.2.3 Knowledge Acquisition; 5.2.3.1 Upper-level Ontological Support; 5.2.3.2 Term Extraction and Ontology Learning from Text; 5.2.4 Acquisition of Conceptual Domain Knowledge; 5.2.4.1 Grouping and Initial Taxonomical Relations. - Enabling information interoperability, fostering legal knowledge usability and reuse, enhancing legal information search, in short, formalizing the complexity of legal knowledge to enhance legal knowledge management are challenging tasks, for which different solutions and lines of research have been proposed. During the last decade, research and applications based on the use of legal ontologies as a technique to represent legal knowledge has raised a very interesting debate about their capacity and limitations to represent conceptual structures in the legal domain. Making conceptual legal know

Electronic books.

340.0285

9789400714960