41 Documents
- skoseditor
2010-05-07
- "Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist" - bobdc.blog
2009-05-28
- "E Pluribus Unum", or "Inversely Functional Identity", or "Smooshing Without the Stickiness" (re-updated)
2008-12-17
- W3C Semantic Web Activity News - Eleven W3C Publications Related to OWL 2
2008-12-08
- Relational Database Integration with RDF/OWL
Using the W3C OWL ontology standard lets you get more out of all kinds of data. Find out how this standard and some free software lets you query two databases as if they were one.
The primary goal of this article is to put together a demonstration of how you can use OWL to integrate two relational databases, and then perform queries against the aggregate collection to answer realistic questions that you could not answer without the addition of an OWL ontology.
2008-08-01
- Experiences with the conversion of SenseLab databases to RDF/OWL
2008-06-12
- Structured Objects in OWL: Representation and Reasoning. In Proc. of the 17th Int. World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2008), Beijing
Very good presentation at WWW 2008. Nominated for the best paper award
Abstract: Applications of semantic technologies often require the representation of and reasoning with structured objects—that is, objects composed of parts connected in complex ways. Although OWL is a general and powerful language, its class descriptions and axioms cannot be used to describe arbitrarily connected structures. An OWL representation of structured objects can thus be underconstrained, which reduces the inferences that can be drawn and causes performance problems in reasoning. To address these problems, we extend OWL with description graphs, which allow for the description of structured objects in a simple and precise way. To represent conditional aspects of the domain, we also allow for SWRL-like rules over description graphs. Based on an observation about the nature of structured objects, we ensure decidability of our formalism. We also present a hypertableau-based decision procedure, which we implemented in the HermiT reasoner. To evaluate its performance, we have extracted description graphs from the GALEN and FMA ontologies, classified them successfully, and even detected a modeling error in GALEN.
2008-04-23
- GRDDL in OwlSight | Thinking Clearly
2008-04-11
- MyCarEvent - Terminology and Methodology for populating the generic information model
2008-01-20
- UserRequirements - owl1-1 - Google Code
Home page de la task force animée par Christine Golbreich
2008-01-08
- MYCAREVENT: OWL and the automotive repair information supply chain - Proceedings of Extreme Markup Languages®
2007-10-05
- OWL 1.1 Web Ontology Language Overview
2007-09-19
- Submission Request to W3C: OWL 1.1 Web Ontology Language
2007-09-19
- OWL Web Ontology Language Guide
2007-09-19
- bobdc.blog: Some great W3C explanations of basic ontology concepts
2007-08-06
- CO-ODE
The CO-ODE project aims to build authoring tools and infrastructure that make ontology engineering easier. We specifically support the development and use of OWL-DL ontologies, by being heavily involved in the creation of infrastructure and plugins for the Protégé platform and more recently, OWL1.1 support for the OWL API.
2007-07-26
- SKOS Extensions [RDF/OWL Description]
An RDF vocabulary containing extensions to SKOS Core useful for specialised applications.
2007-07-18
- "Semantic Web Technologies in Technical Automotive" - CEUR-WS.org/Vol-258 - OWL: Experiences and Directions 2007
Mon papier à OWLED 2007
2007-07-13
- CEUR-WS.org/Vol-258 - OWL: Experiences and Directions 2007
2007-07-13
- P2NotesOwled2007 - owl1-1 - Google Code
2007-06-29
- S1NotesOwled2007 - owl1-1 - Google Code
2007-06-29
- owl1-1 - Google Code
2007-06-27
- OWLED 2007 - LeibnizWiki
2007-06-23
- Structured Ontology Format
Rob Shearer The University of Manchester
(nice demo of an ajax script at OWLED 2007)
Abstract. This paper presents a simple data model for the representation
of OWL ontologies (including the new features of OWL 1.1). The
model is built from basic structures native to all common programming
environments, so it can be used directly as an API for ontology analysis
and manipulation. Furthermore, serialization of these structures using
the widely-supported YAML standard yields a readable text format
suitable for ontology authoring by average users with text editors and
code-management tools.
2007-06-07
- OWLED 2007 Program
2007-06-04
- EasyChair. Login Page for OWLED 2007
2007-05-05
- An OWL model for managing ontologies in the agricultural domain
From AGROVOC to the Agricultural Ontology Service / Concept Server
2007-04-02
- OWL: Experiences and Directions - OWLED 2007
2007-03-04
- Horst, Herman J. ter: Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary
We prove that entailment for RDFS (RDF Schema) is decidable, NP-complete, and in P if the target graph does not contain blank nodes.We show that the standard set of entailment rules for RDFS is incomplete and that this can be corrected by allowing blank nodes in predicate position. We define semantic extensions of RDFS that involve datatypes and a subset of the OWL vocabulary that includes the property-related vocabulary (e.g. Functional- Property), the comparisons (e.g. sameAs and differentFrom) and the value restrictions (e.g. allValuesFrom). These semantic extensions are in line with the 'if-semantics' of RDFS and weaker than the 'iff-semantics' of D-entailment and OWL (DL or Full). For these semantic extensions we present entailment rules, prove completeness results, prove that consistency is in P and that, just as for RDFS, entailment is NP-complete, and in P if the target graph does not contain blank nodes. There are no restrictions on use to obtain decidability: classes can be used as instances.
2007-02-06
- ProtegeWiki: Modeling Tips And Tricks
2006-12-23
- On the properties of metamodeling in OWL
Abstract: A common practice in conceptual modeling is to separate the intensional from the extensional model. Although very intuitive, this approach is inadequate for many complex domains, where the borderline between the two models is not clear-cut. Therefore, OWL-Full, the most expressive of the Semantic Web ontology languages, allows combining the intensional and the extensional model by a feature we refer to as metamodeling. In this paper, we show that the semantics of metamodeling adopted in OWL-Full leads to undecidability of basic inference problems, due to free mixing of logical and metalogical symbols. Based on this result, we propose two alternative semantics for metamodeling: the contextual and the HiLog semantics. We show that SHOIQ— a description logic underlying OWL-DL— extended with metamodeling under either semantics is decidable. Finally, we show how the latter semantics can be used in practice to axiomatize the logical interaction between concepts and metaconcepts.
Eagle is a type of RedListSpecies. Thus, RedListSpecies acts as a
metaconcept for Eagle
The examples such as the one given above are often dismissed with an argument that “eagle as a species” and “eagle as a set of all individual eagles”
are not the one and the same thing, and should not be referred to using the
same symbol...we simply observe that the word “eagle” in most people’s minds invokes a notion of a “mighty bird of prey.” The interpretation of
this notion as a concept or as an individual is secondary and is often context-dependent, so using different symbols for the same intuitive notion makes the
model unnecessarily complex.
2006-12-01
- PR-OWL: A Bayesian Framework for the Semantic Web
2006-11-07
- PR-OWL: A Bayesian Ontology Language for the Semantic Web
2006-09-07
- UMBC eBiquity - Publications - Probabilistic Framework for Semantic Web - OWL and Bayes Networks
2006-05-01
- alphaWorks : IBM Web Ontology Manager
IBM Web Ontology Manager is a lightweight, Web-based tool for managing ontologies expressed in Web Ontology Language (OWL). With this technology, users can browse, search, and submit ontologies to an ontology repository. This technology includes a Web interface for easy uploading of ontologies in an .owl format by any user of the system. It also includes an interface for generating (using Jastor) Java™ APIs from uploaded ontology files.
IBM Web Ontology Manager differs from IBM Ontology Management System (a former alphaWorks technology, now merged into the IBM Integrated Ontology Development Toolkit) in that it does not include a statement repository. Instead, based on the ontologies visible to the system, it can generate Java classes for accessing any Jena-compatible RDF statement repository.
2006-04-29
- Altova SemanticWorks
RDF/OWL editor from the creators of XMLSpy
2005-10-06
- danbri’s foaf stories » SPARQLing Protégé-OWL Jena integration
2005-08-18
- Danny Ayers, Raw Blog - Taxonomies in OWL
2005-07-06
- UMBC eBiquity Project: Bayes OWL
2005-07-04
- Jastor
Jastor generates Java interfaces, implementations, factories, and listeners based on the properties and class hierarchies in the Web Ontologies.
2005-06-24
- UMBC eBiquity Publication: A Bayesian Methodology towards Automatic Ontology Mapping
2005-06-15
Preferences...