- From: Peter Crowther <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:49:42 -0000
- To: "'Charlie Abela'" <abcharl@maltanet.net>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> From: Charlie Abela [mailto:abcharl@maltanet.net] > A DAML+OIL ontology can be parsed using various APIs such as DAML API or Jena, that would give the structure of the ontology. But an interpreter is a must if one has to make sense out of the structures parsed. By just parsing the DAML gets you only half way through the process; interpretation has to be the next step. Correct? Correct. > There are I suppose ready made interpreters available.... To an extent, yes. > Which ones are most readily used and also easier to use? If you download OilEd (http://img.cs.man.ac.uk/oil), you'll find that it can read DAML+OIL but can also connect to a back-end reasoner such as FaCT (http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/FaCT) or Cerebra (http://download.networkinference.com). That's the system I tend to use --- unsurprisingly :-). SHIQ --- the more expressive of the two FaCT engines --- can handle almost all of DAML+OIL except the datatypes; Cerebra can't do inverse roles or counted quantifiers but can do some datatypes. > What issues need to be considered if one wants to implement or extend an interpreter? It's a Bloody Difficult Job. I compare it to the relational database market --- why implement/extend a RDBMS when all you want to do is use one? - Peter
Received on Friday, 21 December 2001 10:50:43 UTC