> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 14:20, Alan Ruttenberg<alanruttenberg@gmail.com> wrot > e: > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Ian > > Horrocks<ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > >> At least HermiT and Pellet are able to operate completely independently -- > >> they can take an OWL 2 ontology in RDF/XML format and check if it is > >> satisfiable. The use of Mike's test harness is merely a convenience. > > > > What are they using for parsers? Given the setup with P4 as example, > > my expectation would have been that they both use the OWLAPI to the > > parsing. > > Pellet supports parsing OWL 2 RDF/XML from either its OWLAPI or Jena interfac > es. Good to hear. When using the Jena interface, you're saying Pellet has its own complete implementation of the mapping-to-rdf spec? Have you compared the two parsing systems, side by side, on all inputs, or anything like that? -- SandroReceived on Wednesday, 29 July 2009 19:28:58 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 29 July 2009 19:28:59 GMT