W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2009

Re: OWL and LOD

From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 23:19:13 +0200
To: public-lod@w3.org
Cc: John Goodwin <John.Goodwin@ordnancesurvey.co.uk>
Message-id: <200905122319.17117.kjetil@kjernsmo.net>
On Tuesday 12 May 2009, John Goodwin wrote:
> I know there is a new SPARQL working group - is there much talk of
> OWL inference + SPARQL going on there?

Yes, there is. I may have come across in the minutes as an "OWL 
skeptic", since I was the only one opposing the view that the group 
should spend time on it but really, I'm not. It is just that we've used 
some pretty simple reasoning in a commercial solution, and we didn't 
really get the performance we wanted and thus concluded it is still 
hard to sell, and therefore other matters should be prioritized. 

I think that the whole range of ontologies, from the informal SKOS 
thesauri to the formal rigorous OWL Big-O ontologies makes sense for 
different things, but that one should be aware of strengths and 
weaknesses for each application, and that some things may take a couple 
of years to "get there". 

Cheers,

Kjetil
-- 
Kjetil Kjernsmo
Programmer / Astrophysicist / Ski-orienteer / Orienteer / Mountaineer
kjetil@kjernsmo.net
Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/     OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC
Received on Tuesday, 12 May 2009 21:19:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:20 UTC