W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > October 2006

Re: OWL vs RDF

From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:22:22 +0000
To: William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-ID: <upscbw92p.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk>

>>>>> "WB" == William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu> writes:

  WB> This is a very important point.  Thanks, Phil.

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

Yes, and this is a good route in some cases. It's worth remembering,
however, that if you do this then it limits the usages you can make of
the ontology -- you can't, for instance, express queries against the
ontology using classes which are not mentioned in the ontology
already. The ability to combine the conceptual lego of an ontology at
any points is very useful at many times. 

But, it can make deployment architectures simpler. You win some, you
loose some. 

Received on Sunday, 29 October 2006 17:20:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:52:28 UTC