This thesis addresses the issues of coherent distributed knowledge production and sharing in the Life-science area. In spite of the continuously increasing computing and storage capabilities of computing infrastructures, the management of massive scientific data through centralized approaches became inappropriate, for several reasons: (i) they do not guarantee the autonomy property of data providers, constrained, for either ethical or legal concerns, to keep the control over the data they host, (ii) they do not scale and adapt to the massive scientific data produced through e-Science platforms. In the context of the NeuroLOG and VIP Life-science collaborative platforms, we address on one hand, distribution and heterogeneity issues underlying, possibly sensitive, resource sharing ; and on the other hand, automated knowledge production through the usage of these e-Science platforms, to ease the exploitation of the massively produced scientific data. We rely on an ontological approach for knowledge modeling and propose, based on Semantic Web technologies, to (i) extend these platforms with efficient, static and dynamic, transparent federated semantic querying strategies, and (ii) to extend their data processing environment, from both provenance information captured at run-time and domain-specific inference rules, to automate the semantic annotation of ''in silico'' experiment results. The results of this thesis have been evaluated on the Grid'5000 distributed and controlled infrastructure. They contribute to addressing three of the main challenging issues faced in the area of computational science platforms through (i) a model for secured collaborations and a distributed access control strategy allowing for the setup of multi-centric studies while still considering competitive activities, (ii) semantic experiment summaries, meaningful from the end-user perspective, aimed at easing the navigation into massive scientific data resulting from large-scale experimental campaigns, and (iii) efficient distributed querying and reasoning strategies, relying on Semantic Web standards, aimed at sharing capitalized knowledge and providing connectivity towards the Web of Linked Data.

Nous présentons une recherche en ingénierie des connaissances appliquée aux prédicats linguistiques et aux définitions lexicographiques de la théorie Sens-Texte (TST). Notre méthodologie comporte trois étapes. 1. Nous montrons en quoi la conceptualisation de la TST devrait être étendue pour faciliter sa formalisation. Nous justifions la nécessité de définir un niveau sémantique profond (SemP) à base de graphes. Nous y définissons la notion de type d'unité sémantique profonde et sa structure actancielle, de sorte que leur organisation hiérarchique puisse correspondre à une hiérarchie de sens au sein de laquelle ces structures actancielles sont héritées et spécialisées. Nous reconceptualisons les définitions lexicographiques au niveau SemP, et au niveau du dictionnaire. Finalement, nous présentons un prototype d'éditeur de définitions basé sur la manipulation directe de graphes. 2. Nous proposons un formalisme de représentation des connaissances adapté à cette conceptualisation. Nous démontrons que les logiques de description et le formalisme des Graphes Conceptuels ne sont pas adaptés, et nous construisons alors un nouveau formalisme, dit des Graphes d'Unités. 3. Nous étudions l'opérationnalisation du formalisme des Graphes d'Unités. Nous lui associons une sémantique formelle basée sur la théorie des modèles et l'algèbre relationnelle, et montrons que les conditions de décidabilité du raisonnement logique correspondent aux intuitions des lexicographes. Nous proposons également une implémentation du formalisme avec les standards du web sémantique, ce qui permet de profiter des architectures existantes pour l'interopérationnalisation sur le web des données lexicales liées. / We present our research in applying knowledge engineering to linguistic predicates and lexicographic definitions of the Meaning-Text Theory (MTT). We adopt a three-step methodology. 1. We first show how the MTT conceptualization should be extended to ease its formalization. We justify the need of defining a new graph-based deep semantic level. We define the notion of deep semantic unit types and its actantial structure, so that their hierarchical organization may correspond to a hierarchy of meanings, inside which actantial structures are inherited and specialized. We re-conceptualize lexicographic definitions at the deep semantic level, and at the level of dictionaries. Finally, we present a definition editor prototype based on graph direct manipulation, which will allow us, in future work, to integrate our formal model into explanatory combinatorial lexicographic projects. 2. We then propose a knowledge representation formalism (KR) adapted for this conceptualization. We demonstrate that Description Logics and the Conceptual Graphs formalism do not fit our needs. This leads us to construct a new knowledge representation formalism: the Unit Graphs formalism. 3. Finally, we operationalize the Unit Graphs formalism. We assign it a formal semantic model, which we create based on model theory and relational algebra. We then show that the reasoning decidability conditions match the intuitions that lexicographers have. We also provide an implementation using semantic web standards, which enable us to use existing architectures for sharing, interoperability, and knowledge querying over the web of lexical linked data.

Cette thèse s'intéresse à la production et au partage cohérent de connaissances distribuées dans le domaine des sciences de la vie. Malgré l'augmentation constante des capacités de stockage et de calcul des infrastructures informatiques, les approches centralisées pour la gestion de grandes masses de données scientifiques multi-sources deviennent inadaptées pour plusieurs raisons: (i) elles ne garantissent pas l'autonomie des fournisseurs de données qui doivent conserver un certain contrôle sur les données hébergées pour des raisons éthiques et/ou juridiques, (ii) elles ne permettent pas d'envisager le passage à l'échelle des plateformes en sciences computationnelles qui sont la source de productions massives de données scientifiques. Nous nous intéressons, dans le contexte des plateformes collaboratives en sciences de la vie NeuroLOG et VIP, d'une part, aux problématiques de distribution et d'hétérogénéité sous-jacentes au partage de ressources, potentiellement sensibles ; et d'autre part, à la production automatique de connaissances au cours de l'usage de ces plateformes, afin de faciliter l'exploitation de la masse de données produites. Nous nous appuyons sur une approche ontologique pour la modélisation des connaissances et proposons à partir des technologies du web sémantique (i) d'étendre ces plateformes avec des stratégies efficaces, statiques et dynamiques, d'interrogations sémantiques fédérées et (ii) d'étendre leur environnent de traitement de données pour automatiser l'annotation sémantique des résultats d'expérience ``in silico'', à partir de la capture d'informations de provenance à l'exécution et de règles d'inférence spécifiques au domaine. Les résultats de cette thèse, évalués sur l'infrastructure distribuée et contrôlée Grid'5000, apportent des éléments de réponse à trois enjeux majeurs des plateformes collaboratives en sciences computationnelles : (i) un modèle de collaborations sécurisées et une stratégie de contrôle d'accès distribué pour permettre la mise en place d'études multi-centriques dans un environnement compétitif, (ii) des résumés sémantiques d'expérience qui font sens pour l'utilisateur pour faciliter la navigation dans la masse de données produites lors de campagnes expérimentales, et (iii) des stratégies efficaces d'interrogation et de raisonnement fédérés, via les standards du Web Sémantique, pour partager les connaissances capitalisées dans ces plateformes et les ouvrir potentiellement sur le Web de données. Mots-clés: Flots de services et de données scientifiques, Services web sémantiques, Provenance, Web de données, Web sémantique, Fédération de bases de connaissances, Intégration de données distribuées, e-Sciences, e-Santé. / This thesis addresses the issues of coherent distributed knowledge production and sharing in the Life-science area. In spite of the continuously increasing computing and storage capabilities of computing infrastructures, the management of massive scientific data through centralized approaches became inappropriate, for several reasons: (i) they do not guarantee the autonomy property of data providers, constrained, for either ethical or legal concerns, to keep the control over the data they host, (ii) they do not scale and adapt to the massive scientific data produced through e-Science platforms. In the context of the NeuroLOG and VIP Life-science collaborative platforms, we address on one hand, distribution and heterogeneity issues underlying, possibly sensitive, resource sharing ; and on the other hand, automated knowledge production through the usage of these e-Science platforms, to ease the exploitation of the massively produced scientific data. We rely on an ontological approach for knowledge modeling and propose, based on Semantic Web technologies, to (i) extend these platforms with efficient, static and dynamic, transparent federated semantic querying strategies, and (ii) to extend their data processing environment, from both provenance information captured at run-time and domain-specific inference rules, to automate the semantic annotation of ``in silico'' experiment results. The results of this thesis have been evaluated on the Grid'5000 distributed and controlled infrastructure. They contribute to addressing three of the main challenging issues faced in the area of computational science platforms through (i) a model for secured collaborations and a distributed access control strategy allowing for the setup of multi-centric studies while still considering competitive activities, (ii) semantic experiment summaries, meaningful from the end-user perspective, aimed at easing the navigation into massive scientific data resulting from large-scale experimental campaigns, and (iii) efficient distributed querying and reasoning strategies, relying on Semantic Web standards, aimed at sharing capitalized knowledge and providing connectivity towards the Web of Linked Data.

Data masses on the World Wide Web can hardly be managed by humans or machines. One option is the formal description and linking of data sources using Semantic Web and Linked Data technologies. Ontologies written in standardised languages foster the sharing and linking of data as they provide a means to formally define concepts and relations between these concepts. A second option is visualisation. The visual representation allows humans to perceive information more directly, using the highly developed visual sense. Relatively few efforts have been made on combining both options, although the formality and rich semantics of ontological data make it an ideal candidate for visualisation. Advanced visualisation design systems support the visualisation of tabular, typically statistical data. However, visualisations of ontological data still have to be created manually, since automated solutions are often limited to generic lists or node-link diagrams. Also, the semantics of ontological data are not exploited for guiding users through visualisation tasks. Finally, once a good visualisation setting has been created, it cannot easily be reused and shared. Trying to tackle these problems, we had to answer how to define composable and shareable mappings from ontological data to visual means and how to guide the visual mapping of ontological data. We present an approach that allows for the guided visualisation of ontological data, the creation of effective graphics and the reuse of visualisation settings. Instead of generic graphics, we aim at tailor-made graphics, produced using the whole palette of visual means in a flexible, bottom-up approach. It not only allows for visualising ontologies, but uses ontologies to guide users when visualising data and to drive the visualisation process at various places: First, as a rich source of information on data characteristics, second, as a means to formally describe the vocabulary for building abstract graphics, and third, as a knowledge base of facts on visualisation. This is why we call our approach ontology-driven. We suggest generating an Abstract Visual Model (AVM) to represent and »synthesise« a graphic following a role-based approach, inspired by the one used by J. v. Engelhardt for the analysis of graphics. It consists of graphic objects and relations formalised in the Visualisation Ontology (VISO). A mappings model, based on the declarative RDFS/OWL Visualisation Language (RVL), determines a set of transformations from the domain data to the AVM. RVL allows for composable visual mappings that can be shared and reused across platforms. To guide the user, for example, we discourage the construction of mappings that are suboptimal according to an effectiveness ranking formalised in the fact base and suggest more effective mappings instead. The guidance process is flexible, since it is based on exchangeable rules. VISO, RVL and the AVM are additional contributions of this thesis. Further, we initially analysed the state of the art in visualisation and RDF-presentation comparing 10 approaches by 29 criteria. Our approach is unique because it combines ontology-driven guidance with composable visual mappings. Finally, we compare three prototypes covering the essential parts of our approach to show its feasibility. We show how the mapping process can be supported by tools displaying warning messages for non-optimal visual mappings, e.g., by considering relation characteristics such as »symmetry«. In a constructive evaluation, we challenge both the RVL language and the latest prototype trying to regenerate sketches of graphics we created manually during analysis. We demonstrate how graphics can be varied and complex mappings can be composed from simple ones. Two thirds of the sketches can be almost or completely specified and half of them can be almost or completely implemented.:Legend and Overview of Prefixes xiii 1 Introduction 1 2 Background 11 2.1 Visualisation 11 2.1.1 What is Visualisation? 11 2.1.2 What are the Benefits of Visualisation? 12 2.1.3 Visualisation Related Terms Used in this Thesis 12 2.1.4 Visualisation Models and Architectural Patterns 12 2.1.5 Visualisation Design Systems 14 2.1.6 What is the Difference between Visual Mapping and Styling? 14 2.1.7 Lessons Learned from Style Sheet Languages 15 2.2 Data 16 2.2.1 Data – Information – Knowledge 17 2.2.2 Structured Data 17 2.2.3 Ontologies in Computer Science 19 2.2.4 The Semantic Web and its Languages 19 2.2.5 Linked Data and Open Data 20 2.2.6 The Metamodelling Technological Space 21 2.2.7 SPIN 21 2.3 Guidance 22 2.3.1 Guidance in Visualisation 22 3 Problem Analysis 23 3.1 Problems of Ontology Visualisation Approaches 24 3.2 Research Questions 25 3.3 Set up of the Case Studies 25 3.3.1 Case Studies in the Life Sciences Domain 26 3.3.2 Case Studies in the Publishing Domain 26 3.3.3 Case Studies in the Software Technology Domain 27 3.4 Analysis of the Case Studies’ Ontologies 27 3.5 Manual Sketching of Graphics 29 3.6 Analysis of the Graphics for Typical Visualisation Cases 29 3.7 Requirements 33 3.7.1 Requirements for Visualisation and Interaction 34 3.7.2 Requirements for Data Awareness 34 3.7.3 Requirements for Reuse and Composition 34 3.7.4 Requirements for Variability 35 3.7.5 Requirements for Tooling Support and Guidance 35 3.7.6 Optional Features and Limitations 36 4 Analysis of the State of the Art 37 4.1 Related Visualisation Approaches 38 4.1.1 Short Overview of the Approaches 38 4.1.2 Detailed Comparison by Criteria 46 4.1.3 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 60 4.2 Visualisation Languages 62 4.2.1 Short Overview of the Compared Languages 62 4.2.2 Detailed Comparison by Language Criteria 66 4.2.3 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 71 4.3 RDF Presentation Languages 72 4.3.1 Short Overview of the Compared Languages 72 4.3.2 Detailed Comparison by Language Criteria 76 4.3.3 Additional Criteria for RDF Display Languages 87 4.3.4 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 89 4.4 Model-Driven Interfaces 90 4.4.1 Metamodel-Driven Interfaces 90 4.4.2 Ontology-Driven Interfaces 92 4.4.3 Combined Usage of the Metamodelling and Ontology Technological Space 94 5 A Visualisation Ontology – VISO 97 5.1 Methodology Used for Ontology Creation 100 5.2 Requirements for a Visualisation Ontology 100 5.3 Existing Approaches to Modelling in the Field of Visualisation 101 5.3.1 Terminologies and Taxonomies 101 5.3.2 Existing Visualisation Ontologies 102 5.3.3 Other Visualisation Models and Approaches to Formalisation 103 5.3.4 Summary 103 5.4 Technical Aspects of VISO 103 5.5 VISO/graphic Module – Graphic Vocabulary 104 5.5.1 Graphic Representations and Graphic Objects 105 5.5.2 Graphic Relations and Syntactic Structures 107 5.6 VISO/data Module – Characterising Data 110 5.6.1 Data Structure and Characteristics of Relations 110 5.6.2 The Scale of Measurement and Units 112 5.6.3 Properties for Characterising Data Variables in Statistical Data 113 5.7 VISO/facts Module – Facts for Vis. Constraints and Rules 115 5.7.1 Expressiveness of Graphic Relations 116 5.7.2 Effectiveness Ranking of Graphic Relations 118 5.7.3 Rules for Composing Graphics 119 5.7.4 Other Rules to Consider for Visual Mapping 124 5.7.5 Providing Named Value Collections 124 5.7.6 Existing Approaches to the Formalisation of Visualisation Knowledge . . 126 5.7.7 The VISO/facts/empiric Example Knowledge Base 126 5.8 Other VISO Modules 126 5.9 Conclusions and Future Work 127 5.10 Further Use Cases for VISO 127 5.11 VISO on the Web – Sharing the Vocabulary to Build a Community 128 6 A VISO-Based Abstract Visual Model – AVM 129 6.1 Graphical Notation Used in this Chapter 129 6.2 Elementary Graphic Objects and Graphic Attributes 131 6.3 N-Ary Relations 131 6.4 Binary Relations 131 6.5 Composition of Graphic Objects Using Roles 132 6.6 Composition of Graphic Relations Using Roles 132 6.7 Composition of Visual Mappings Using the AVM 135 6.8 Tracing 135 6.9 Is it Worth Having an Abstract Visual Model? 135 6.10 Discussion of Fresnel as a Related Language 137 6.11 Related Work 139 6.12 Limitations 139 6.13 Conclusions 140 7 A Language for RDFS/OWL Visualisation – RVL 141 7.1 Language Requirements 142 7.2 Main RVL Constructs 145 7.2.1 Mapping 145 7.2.2 Property Mapping 146 7.2.3 Identity Mapping 146 7.2.4 Value Mapping 147 7.2.5 Inheriting RVL Settings 147 7.2.6 Resource Mapping 148 7.2.7 Simplifications 149 7.3 Calculating Value Mappings 150 7.4 Defining Scale of Measurement 153 7.4.1 Determining the Scale of Measurement 154 7.5 Addressing Values in Value Mappings 156 7.5.1 Determining the Set of Addressed Source Values 156 7.5.2 Determining the Set of Addressed Target Values 157 7.6 Overlapping Value Mappings 158 7.7 Default Value Mapping 158 7.8 Default Labelling 159 7.9 Defining Interaction 159 7.10 Mapping Composition and Submappings 160 7.11 A Schema Language for RVL 160 7.11.1 Concrete Examples of the RVL Schema 163 7.12 Conclusions and Future Work 166 8 The OGVIC Approach 169 8.1 Ontology-Driven, Guided Editing of Visual Mappings 172 8.1.1 Classification of Constraints 172 8.1.2 Levels of Guidance 173 8.1.3 Implementing Constraint-Based Guidance 173 8.2 Support of Explicit and Composable Visual Mappings 177 8.2.1 Mapping Composition Cases 178 8.2.2 Selecting a Context 180 8.2.3 Using the Same Graphic Relation Multiple Times 181 8.3 Prototype P1 (TopBraid-Composer-based) 182 8.4 Prototype P2 (OntoWiki-based) 184 8.5 Prototype P3 (Java Implementation of RVL) 187 8.6 Lessons Learned from Prototypes & Future Work 190 8.6.1 Checking RVL Constraints and Visualisation Rules 190 8.6.2 A User Interface for Editing RVL Mappings 190 8.6.3 Graph Transformations with SPIN and SPARQL 1.1 Update 192 8.6.4 Selection and Filtering of Data 193 8.6.5 Interactivity and Incremental Processing 193 8.6.6 Rendering the Final Platform-Specific Code 196 9 Application 197 9.1 Coverage of Case Study Sketches and Necessary Features 198 9.2 Coverage of Visualisation Cases 201 9.3 Coverage of Requirements 205 9.4 Full Example 206 10 Conclusions 211 10.1 Contributions 211 10.2 Constructive Evaluation 212 10.3 Research Questions 213 10.4 Transfer to Other Models and Constraint Languages 213 10.5 Limitations 214 10.6 Future Work 214 Appendices 217 A Case Study Sketches 219 B VISO – Comparison of Visualisation Literature 229 C RVL 231 D RVL Example Mappings and Application 233 D.1 Listings of RVL Example Mappings as Required by Prototype P3 233 D.2 Features Required for Implementing all Sketches 235 D.3 JSON Format for Processing the AVM with D3 – Hierarchical Variant 238 Bibliography 238 List of Figures 251 List of Tables 254 List of Listings 257 / Datenmassen im World Wide Web können kaum von Menschen oder Maschinen erfasst werden. Eine Option ist die formale Beschreibung und Verknüpfung von Datenquellen mit Semantic-Web- und Linked-Data-Technologien. Ontologien, in standardisierten Sprachen geschrieben, befördern das Teilen und Verknüpfen von Daten, da sie ein Mittel zur formalen Definition von Konzepten und Beziehungen zwischen diesen Konzepten darstellen. Eine zweite Option ist die Visualisierung. Die visuelle Repräsentation ermöglicht es dem Menschen, Informationen direkter wahrzunehmen, indem er seinen hochentwickelten Sehsinn verwendet. Relativ wenige Anstrengungen wurden unternommen, um beide Optionen zu kombinieren, obwohl die Formalität und die reichhaltige Semantik ontologische Daten zu einem idealen Kandidaten für die Visualisierung machen. Visualisierungsdesignsysteme unterstützen Nutzer bei der Visualisierung von tabellarischen, typischerweise statistischen Daten. Visualisierungen ontologischer Daten jedoch müssen noch manuell erstellt werden, da automatisierte Lösungen häufig auf generische Listendarstellungen oder Knoten-Kanten-Diagramme beschränkt sind. Auch die Semantik der ontologischen Daten wird nicht ausgenutzt, um Benutzer durch Visualisierungsaufgaben zu führen. Einmal erstellte Visualisierungseinstellungen können nicht einfach wiederverwendet und geteilt werden. Um diese Probleme zu lösen, mussten wir eine Antwort darauf finden, wie die Definition komponierbarer und wiederverwendbarer Abbildungen von ontologischen Daten auf visuelle Mittel geschehen könnte und wie Nutzer bei dieser Abbildung geführt werden könnten. Wir stellen einen Ansatz vor, der die geführte Visualisierung von ontologischen Daten, die Erstellung effektiver Grafiken und die Wiederverwendung von Visualisierungseinstellungen ermöglicht. Statt auf generische Grafiken zielt der Ansatz auf maßgeschneiderte Grafiken ab, die mit der gesamten Palette visueller Mittel in einem flexiblen Bottom-Up-Ansatz erstellt werden. Er erlaubt nicht nur die Visualisierung von Ontologien, sondern verwendet auch Ontologien, um Benutzer bei der Visualisierung von Daten zu führen und den Visualisierungsprozess an verschiedenen Stellen zu steuern: Erstens als eine reichhaltige Informationsquelle zu Datencharakteristiken, zweitens als Mittel zur formalen Beschreibung des Vokabulars für den Aufbau von abstrakten Grafiken und drittens als Wissensbasis von Visualisierungsfakten. Deshalb nennen wir unseren Ansatz ontologie-getrieben. Wir schlagen vor, ein Abstract Visual Model (AVM) zu generieren, um eine Grafik rollenbasiert zu synthetisieren, angelehnt an einen Ansatz der von J. v. Engelhardt verwendet wird, um Grafiken zu analysieren. Das AVM besteht aus grafischen Objekten und Relationen, die in der Visualisation Ontology (VISO) formalisiert sind. Ein Mapping-Modell, das auf der deklarativen RDFS/OWL Visualisation Language (RVL) basiert, bestimmt eine Menge von Transformationen von den Quelldaten zum AVM. RVL ermöglicht zusammensetzbare »Mappings«, visuelle Abbildungen, die über Plattformen hinweg geteilt und wiederverwendet werden können. Um den Benutzer zu führen, bewerten wir Mappings anhand eines in der Faktenbasis formalisierten Effektivitätsrankings und schlagen ggf. effektivere Mappings vor. Der Beratungsprozess ist flexibel, da er auf austauschbaren Regeln basiert. VISO, RVL und das AVM sind weitere Beiträge dieser Arbeit. Darüber hinaus analysieren wir zunächst den Stand der Technik in der Visualisierung und RDF-Präsentation, indem wir 10 Ansätze nach 29 Kriterien vergleichen. Unser Ansatz ist einzigartig, da er eine ontologie-getriebene Nutzerführung mit komponierbaren visuellen Mappings vereint. Schließlich vergleichen wir drei Prototypen, welche die wesentlichen Teile unseres Ansatzes umsetzen, um seine Machbarkeit zu zeigen. Wir zeigen, wie der Mapping-Prozess durch Tools unterstützt werden kann, die Warnmeldungen für nicht optimale visuelle Abbildungen anzeigen, z. B. durch Berücksichtigung von Charakteristiken der Relationen wie »Symmetrie«. In einer konstruktiven Evaluation fordern wir sowohl die RVL-Sprache als auch den neuesten Prototyp heraus, indem wir versuchen Skizzen von Grafiken umzusetzen, die wir während der Analyse manuell erstellt haben. Wir zeigen, wie Grafiken variiert werden können und komplexe Mappings aus einfachen zusammengesetzt werden können. Zwei Drittel der Skizzen können fast vollständig oder vollständig spezifiziert werden und die Hälfte kann fast vollständig oder vollständig umgesetzt werden.:Legend and Overview of Prefixes xiii 1 Introduction 1 2 Background 11 2.1 Visualisation 11 2.1.1 What is Visualisation? 11 2.1.2 What are the Benefits of Visualisation? 12 2.1.3 Visualisation Related Terms Used in this Thesis 12 2.1.4 Visualisation Models and Architectural Patterns 12 2.1.5 Visualisation Design Systems 14 2.1.6 What is the Difference between Visual Mapping and Styling? 14 2.1.7 Lessons Learned from Style Sheet Languages 15 2.2 Data 16 2.2.1 Data – Information – Knowledge 17 2.2.2 Structured Data 17 2.2.3 Ontologies in Computer Science 19 2.2.4 The Semantic Web and its Languages 19 2.2.5 Linked Data and Open Data 20 2.2.6 The Metamodelling Technological Space 21 2.2.7 SPIN 21 2.3 Guidance 22 2.3.1 Guidance in Visualisation 22 3 Problem Analysis 23 3.1 Problems of Ontology Visualisation Approaches 24 3.2 Research Questions 25 3.3 Set up of the Case Studies 25 3.3.1 Case Studies in the Life Sciences Domain 26 3.3.2 Case Studies in the Publishing Domain 26 3.3.3 Case Studies in the Software Technology Domain 27 3.4 Analysis of the Case Studies’ Ontologies 27 3.5 Manual Sketching of Graphics 29 3.6 Analysis of the Graphics for Typical Visualisation Cases 29 3.7 Requirements 33 3.7.1 Requirements for Visualisation and Interaction 34 3.7.2 Requirements for Data Awareness 34 3.7.3 Requirements for Reuse and Composition 34 3.7.4 Requirements for Variability 35 3.7.5 Requirements for Tooling Support and Guidance 35 3.7.6 Optional Features and Limitations 36 4 Analysis of the State of the Art 37 4.1 Related Visualisation Approaches 38 4.1.1 Short Overview of the Approaches 38 4.1.2 Detailed Comparison by Criteria 46 4.1.3 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 60 4.2 Visualisation Languages 62 4.2.1 Short Overview of the Compared Languages 62 4.2.2 Detailed Comparison by Language Criteria 66 4.2.3 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 71 4.3 RDF Presentation Languages 72 4.3.1 Short Overview of the Compared Languages 72 4.3.2 Detailed Comparison by Language Criteria 76 4.3.3 Additional Criteria for RDF Display Languages 87 4.3.4 Conclusion – What Is Still Missing? 89 4.4 Model-Driven Interfaces 90 4.4.1 Metamodel-Driven Interfaces 90 4.4.2 Ontology-Driven Interfaces 92 4.4.3 Combined Usage of the Metamodelling and Ontology Technological Space 94 5 A Visualisation Ontology – VISO 97 5.1 Methodology Used for Ontology Creation 100 5.2 Requirements for a Visualisation Ontology 100 5.3 Existing Approaches to Modelling in the Field of Visualisation 101 5.3.1 Terminologies and Taxonomies 101 5.3.2 Existing Visualisation Ontologies 102 5.3.3 Other Visualisation Models and Approaches to Formalisation 103 5.3.4 Summary 103 5.4 Technical Aspects of VISO 103 5.5 VISO/graphic Module – Graphic Vocabulary 104 5.5.1 Graphic Representations and Graphic Objects 105 5.5.2 Graphic Relations and Syntactic Structures 107 5.6 VISO/data Module – Characterising Data 110 5.6.1 Data Structure and Characteristics of Relations 110 5.6.2 The Scale of Measurement and Units 112 5.6.3 Properties for Characterising Data Variables in Statistical Data 113 5.7 VISO/facts Module – Facts for Vis. Constraints and Rules 115 5.7.1 Expressiveness of Graphic Relations 116 5.7.2 Effectiveness Ranking of Graphic Relations 118 5.7.3 Rules for Composing Graphics 119 5.7.4 Other Rules to Consider for Visual Mapping 124 5.7.5 Providing Named Value Collections 124 5.7.6 Existing Approaches to the Formalisation of Visualisation Knowledge . . 126 5.7.7 The VISO/facts/empiric Example Knowledge Base 126 5.8 Other VISO Modules 126 5.9 Conclusions and Future Work 127 5.10 Further Use Cases for VISO 127 5.11 VISO on the Web – Sharing the Vocabulary to Build a Community 128 6 A VISO-Based Abstract Visual Model – AVM 129 6.1 Graphical Notation Used in this Chapter 129 6.2 Elementary Graphic Objects and Graphic Attributes 131 6.3 N-Ary Relations 131 6.4 Binary Relations 131 6.5 Composition of Graphic Objects Using Roles 132 6.6 Composition of Graphic Relations Using Roles 132 6.7 Composition of Visual Mappings Using the AVM 135 6.8 Tracing 135 6.9 Is it Worth Having an Abstract Visual Model? 135 6.10 Discussion of Fresnel as a Related Language 137 6.11 Related Work 139 6.12 Limitations 139 6.13 Conclusions 140 7 A Language for RDFS/OWL Visualisation – RVL 141 7.1 Language Requirements 142 7.2 Main RVL Constructs 145 7.2.1 Mapping 145 7.2.2 Property Mapping 146 7.2.3 Identity Mapping 146 7.2.4 Value Mapping 147 7.2.5 Inheriting RVL Settings 147 7.2.6 Resource Mapping 148 7.2.7 Simplifications 149 7.3 Calculating Value Mappings 150 7.4 Defining Scale of Measurement 153 7.4.1 Determining the Scale of Measurement 154 7.5 Addressing Values in Value Mappings 156 7.5.1 Determining the Set of Addressed Source Values 156 7.5.2 Determining the Set of Addressed Target Values 157 7.6 Overlapping Value Mappings 158 7.7 Default Value Mapping 158 7.8 Default Labelling 159 7.9 Defining Interaction 159 7.10 Mapping Composition and Submappings 160 7.11 A Schema Language for RVL 160 7.11.1 Concrete Examples of the RVL Schema 163 7.12 Conclusions and Future Work 166 8 The OGVIC Approach 169 8.1 Ontology-Driven, Guided Editing of Visual Mappings 172 8.1.1 Classification of Constraints 172 8.1.2 Levels of Guidance 173 8.1.3 Implementing Constraint-Based Guidance 173 8.2 Support of Explicit and Composable Visual Mappings 177 8.2.1 Mapping Composition Cases 178 8.2.2 Selecting a Context 180 8.2.3 Using the Same Graphic Relation Multiple Times 181 8.3 Prototype P1 (TopBraid-Composer-based) 182 8.4 Prototype P2 (OntoWiki-based) 184 8.5 Prototype P3 (Java Implementation of RVL) 187 8.6 Lessons Learned from Prototypes & Future Work 190 8.6.1 Checking RVL Constraints and Visualisation Rules 190 8.6.2 A User Interface for Editing RVL Mappings 190 8.6.3 Graph Transformations with SPIN and SPARQL 1.1 Update 192 8.6.4 Selection and Filtering of Data 193 8.6.5 Interactivity and Incremental Processing 193 8.6.6 Rendering the Final Platform-Specific Code 196 9 Application 197 9.1 Coverage of Case Study Sketches and Necessary Features 198 9.2 Coverage of Visualisation Cases 201 9.3 Coverage of Requirements 205 9.4 Full Example 206 10 Conclusions 211 10.1 Contributions 211 10.2 Constructive Evaluation 212 10.3 Research Questions 213 10.4 Transfer to Other Models and Constraint Languages 213 10.5 Limitations 214 10.6 Future Work 214 Appendices 217 A Case Study Sketches 219 B VISO – Comparison of Visualisation Literature 229 C RVL 231 D RVL Example Mappings and Application 233 D.1 Listings of RVL Example Mappings as Required by Prototype P3 233 D.2 Features Required for Implementing all Sketches 235 D.3 JSON Format for Processing the AVM with D3 – Hierarchical Variant 238 Bibliography 238 List of Figures 251 List of Tables 254 List of Listings 257