Re: OWL vs RDF

This is a very important point.  Thanks, Phil.

As is spelled out in the wonderful ProtegeOWL Tutorial PDF (which  
would be wonderful to have updated a bit), leaning on the reasoner  
during early phases of ontology construction is very helpful, but  
ultimately once you have more "hardened" components, you can "save"  
the inferred graph and distribute that for the user community.

Cheers,
Bill

On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:54 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:

>
>
>
>
>>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Stevens <robert.stevens@manchester.ac.uk>  
>>>>>> writes:
>
>   Robert> There's another answer of using the reasoner by building
>   Robert> your ontology to take advantage of its capabilities. the
>   Robert> conceptual lego approach relies on the reasoner.
>
>
>
> Incidentally, Robert's point reminded me of another thing you can do
> without a reasoner.
>
> You can use your reasoner to build your ontology, and then deploy it
> without. One of the main reasons that people don't like DL reasoners s
> the overhead that they add to architectures. I think that this is a
> reasonable point but, in general, only at deployment time. When
> building your ontology, it's not that much hassle to have a
> reasoner -- my experience suggests it saves your more time than it
> costs you.
>
> Phil
>

Bill Bug
Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer

Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics
www.neuroterrain.org
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
Drexel University College of Medicine
2900 Queen Lane
Philadelphia, PA    19129
215 991 8430 (ph)
610 457 0443 (mobile)
215 843 9367 (fax)


Please Note: I now have a new email - William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu