- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:33:06 -0400
- To: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>, Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: Jos de Bruijn <jos.debruijn@deri.org>, Holger Wache <holger@cs.vu.nl>, dreer@fh-furtwangen.de, www-rdf-rules@w3.org, public-sws-ig@w3.org, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
outside of your immediate neighborhood. > >I am not involved in any of the aforesaid great projects, but occasionally >I do run into interesting articles > http://ontology.buffalo.edu/medo/NCIT.pdf > http://www.ipsi.fraunhofer.de/orion/pubFulltexts/NCIReview18Feb04.pdf >which raise questions about the use of OWL for NCIT. actually, the first one you cite raises issue about the quality of the ontology engineering of the thesaurus and not on OWL (which is used to publish the thesaurus which is developed separately by other tools - NCI is considering moving to OWL tools in parts of their process precisely because it would help solve some of these) The second paper argues that to improve the ontology one might have to use OWL-Full. I won't argue with that :-) -JH -- Professor James Hendler Director Joint Institute for Knowledge Discovery 301-405-2696 UMIACS, Univ of Maryland 301-314-9734 (Fax) College Park, MD 20742 http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Friday, 1 July 2005 02:35:44 UTC