INTRODUCTION

Web resource are what make up the World Wide Web. These documents are written in

HTML (hypertext mark-up language) and are translated by your Web browser. Web pages

can either be static or dynamic.

All the information is returned as HTML code, so when the page gets to your browser, all the

browser has to do is translate the HTML.

As the number of web resources has increased explosively, organizing web resources has

become an important topic for information professionals and researchers. Unlike traditional

printed materials or electronic periodicals, most of web resources are not organized with

traditional methods .

The concept of a web resource is primitive in the web architecture, and is used in the

definition of its fundamental elements. The term was first introduced to refer to targets of

uniform resource locators (URLs), but its definition has been further extended to include the

referent of any uniform resource identifier (RFC 3986), or internationalized resource

identifier (RFC 3987). In the Semantic Web, abstract resources and their semantic properties

are described using the family of languages based on Resource Description Framework

(RDF).

HISTORY

The concept of a web resource has evolved during the web history, from the early notion of

static addressable documents or files, to a more generic and abstract definition, now

encompassing every 'thing' or entity that can be identified, named, addressed or handled, in

any way whatsoever, in the web at large, or in any networked information system. The

declarative aspects of a resource (identification and naming) and its functional aspects

(addressing and technical handling) were not clearly distinct in the early specifications of the

web, and the very definition of the concept has been the subject of long and stil open debate

involving dif icult, and often arcane, technical, social, linguistic and philosophical issues.

FROM DOCUMENTS AND FILES TO WEB RESOURCES:

In the early specifications of the web (1990–1994), the term resource is barely used at al .

The web is designed as a network of more or less static addressable objects, basical y files

and documents, linked using uniform resource locators (URLs). A web resource is implicitly

defined as something which can be identified. The identification deserves two distinct

purposes: naming and addressing; the latter only depends on a protocol

RFC 1738 (December 1994) further specifies URLs, the term 'Universal' being changed to

'Uniform'. The document is making a more systematic use of resource to refer to objects

which are 'available', or 'can be located

and accessed' through the internet. There again, the term resource itself is not explicitly

defined.

FROM WEB RESOURCES TO ABSTRACT RESOURCES :

The first explicit definition of resource is found in RFC 2396, in August 1998: 'A resource

can be anything that has identity. Familiar examples include an electronic document, an

image, a service (e.g., "today's weather report for Los Angeles"), and a col ection of other

resources .

METHODOLOGY

To examine whether users' collaborative terms can be applied to classify web resources, we

Selected a consumer health information domain on the web as a test set. As a dataset, we

Selected 34 consumer health information websites suggested by caphis (consumer and

Patient health information section). Tags were collected from delicious.com and the Selected

sites had at least fifty tags. Caphis offers a list of health information sites and Classifies them

into different groups, such as women, men, seniors, kids & parenting, and Drugs. The caphis

classification scheme, which is manually created, was used to assess the Performance of tag-

based classification. The collected data were trimmed by excluding both Extremely general

terms and specific terms. In total, 6416 unique terms were observed across The selected sites.

Among them, we first selected 654 terms that occurred at least five sites Simultaneously, and

then excluded 79 general terms that most frequently occurred across the Sites. Finally, 575

terms were selected in the analysis.

A reduced set of variables is much Easier to analyze and interpret. In this study, we first

explored dimensions of the selected web .

Resources to ensure the possibility of tagging-based classification .Then, hierarchical

clustering was carried out to actually test the classification using user Terms, which is the

primary purpose of this study .

HOW WEB RESOURCES WORK ?

Web Resources rely on a special handler that is named WebResource.axd, which is designed

to retrieve assembly resources and serve them to the Web browser. The handler type for

WebResource.axd is Assembly Resource Loader.

When a request comes in from the client for Web Resource.axd, the handler looks for the

Web Resource identifier in the Query String method of the Request object. Based on the

value of the Web Resource identifier, the handler then tries to load the assembly that contains

this resource. If this operation is successful, the handler will then look for the assembly

attribute and load the resource stream from the assembly. Finally, the handler will grab the

data from the resource stream and send it to the client together with the content type that you

specify in the assembly attribute.

RESOURCES IN RDF AND THE SEMANTIC WEB

First released in 1999, RDF was first intended to describe resources, in other words to

declare metadata of resources in a standard way. A RDF description of a resource is a set of

triples (subject, predicate, object), where subject represents the resource to be described,

predicate a type of property relevant to this resource, and object can be data or another

resource.

The predicate itself is considered as a resource and identified by a URI. Hence, properties

like "title", "author" are represented in RDF as resources, which can be used, in a recursive

way, as the subject of other triples . RDF also specifies the definition of anonymous

resources or blank nodes, which are not absolutely identified by URIs .

USING HTTP URIS TO IDENTIFY ABSTRACT RESOURCES :

URLs, particularly HTTP URIs, are frequently used to identify abstract resources, such as

classes, properties or other kind of concepts. Examples can be found in RDFS or OWL

ontologies.

Since such URIs are associated with the HTTP protocol, the question arose of which kind of

representation, if any, should one get for such resources through this protocol, typical y using

a web browser, and if the syntax of the URI itself could help to dif erentiate "abstract"

resources from "information" resources .

The URI specifications such as RFC 3986 left to the protocol specification the task of

defining actions performed on the resources and they don't provide any answer to this

question. It had been suggested that an HTTP URI identifying a resource in the original

sense, such as a file, document, or any kind of so-cal ed information resource, should be

"slash" URIs — in other words, should not contain a fragment identifier .

RESOURCE OWNERSHIP, INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY AND TRUST :

In RDF, "anybody can declare anything about anything". Resources are defined by formal

descriptions which anyone can publish, copy, modify and publish over the web. If the content

of a web resource in the classical sense (a web page or on-line file) is clearly owned by its

publisher, who can claim intel ectual property on it, an abstract resource can be defined by an

accumulation of RDF descriptions, not necessarily control ed by a unique publisher, and not

necessarily consistent with each other. It's an open issue to know if a resource should have an

authoritative definition with clear and trustable ownership, and in this case, how to make this

description technical y distinct from other descriptions. A paral el issue is how intel ectual

property may apply to such descriptions.

HOW IT HELP IN ORGANISATION

Provide product information to drive local sales 

Sell advertising.

Sell products or services directly over the Internet.

Provide customer service and support.

Build your brand.

Make effective your marketing campaign

Create automated mailing lists for maximum out reach.

Automate your back office functions for efficient documents storage and retrieve.

Conduct market research on products, end-user reviews, customer preferences.

ADVANTAGE OF W EB RESOURCE

Customers and prospects can download information and graphics directly, thus

reducing the need for printed matter.

The cost is only a fraction of that of traditional advertising media.

People love to share of information, jokes, cool websites and a variety of

miscellaneous "gems" of knowledge.

Quicker services delivery.

Knowledge about customer preferences .

DISADVANTAGE OF WEB RESOURCE

Loss of Data (less backups and keep your data secure).

Competition

Time

Accessibility

Cost

CONCLUSION

This study examined whether user generated terms can be used to classify web resources.

We collected user terms from consumer health information sites, and classified them

using hierarchical clustering. By comparing the clustering result with the human-created

classification scheme, we found that the tagging-based clustering showed 100% precise

classification performance. Although this study conducted with a domain-specific

dataset, the 6 findings suggest that user-generated terms can be useful to automatically

organize web resources that are impossible to do manually due to size.

The PCA analysis reveals that the tag information clearly and quite precisely account for

the hidden structure of web resources. In this analysis, the collected tag information can

generate a reasonable clustering of the websites with appropriate quantitative methods.

Hierarchical clustering confirmed that user terms can classify web resources precisely

into the six groups predefined by human-created classification scheme (“women,”

“seniors,” “kids/parenting,” “drugs,” “men,” and “research.”). The results obtained by the

two analyses are closely akin to the classification of websites suggested by CAPHIS.

Therefore, it can be suggested that user’s contribution to describing online web resources

using tags has appropriate credibility in classification.

To expand its usefulness and examine which extend tagging is applied as an organizing

tool, further studies will be conducted for exploring more possibilities of user tag's

organizing web sources with a broader range of interest and terminology . Social tagging

as an organizing tool provide a simpler and easier way to classify web resources than

machine learning methods that require more data traffic, training process, and cost. This

study introduced two data mining methods that can be applicable to classify web

resources in a specific domain. Both PCA and hierarchical clustering methods validated

that social tags can be used as a tool to organize resources on the Web. The preliminary

findings showed that we can apply user-generated terms to automatically classify

resources on the Web. Our study demonstrates that a number of different statistical

methods can be applied to generate a reasonable clustering of web resources based on

tags, requiring less analysis or system training than machine learning techniques .

REFERENCES

Jackson, J. E. (1991).A user's guide to principal components (Vol. 244). Wiley-

Interscience.

Kipp, M. E. I. (2005). Complementary or Discrete Contexts in Online Indexing: A

Comparison of User, Creator, and Intermediary Keywords. Canadian Journal of

Information and Library Science, 29(4):419–436.

Kipp, M. E. I. (2011). Tagging of Biomedical Articles on CiteULike: A

Comparison of User, Author and Professional Indexing. Knowledge Organization

38(3): 245-261.

Yoon, J. (2009). Towards a user-oriented thesaurus for non-domain-specific

image collections. Information Processing & Management 45(4): 452-468.

Xie, I. and Joo, S. (2012). Factors affecting the selection of search tactics: Tasks,

knowledge, process, and systems. Information Processing & Management, 48(2):

254-270.

Web Characterization Terminology & Definitions Sheet

(http://www.w3.org/1999/05/WCA-terms/), editors: Brian Lavoie and Henrik

Frystyk Nielsen, May 1999.

A Short History of "Resource" in web architecture.

(http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/TermResource.html), by Tim Berners-Lee .

What do HTTP URIs Identify? (http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-

URI.html), by Tim Berners-Lee .