- From: Martin Hepp (UniBW) <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:43:51 +0200
- To: Axel Rauschmayer <axel@rauschma.de>
- CC: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4A69BA97.4090202@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Did you look at SPIN? http://spinrdf.org/ That should allow you do do a lot with data without leaving the now mainstream Semantic Web technology stack (as long as a small fragment of OWL is sufficient for you). Best Martin Axel Rauschmayer wrote: > I'm currently reading Hendler's brilliant book "Semantic Web for the > Working Ontologist". It really drove home the point that OWL is not a > good fit when using RDF for *data* (names are generally not unique, > open world assumption, ...). > > But what is the alternative? For my applications, I have the following > requirements: > > - Properties: transitivity, inverse, sub-properties. > - Resources, classes: equivalence. For my purposes, equivalence is a > way of implementing the topic merging in topic maps [1]. > - Constraints for integrity checking. > - Schema declaration: partially overlaps with constraints, serves for > documentation and for providing default values for properties. > - Computed property values: for example, one property value being the > concatenation of two other property values etc. > > The difficulty seems to me to find something universal that fulfills > these requirements and is still easy to understand. Inference, when > used for transitivity and equivalence, is simple, but when it comes to > editing RDF, they can confound the user: Why can some triples be > replaced, others not? Why do I have to replace the triples of a > different instance if I want to replace the triples in my instance? > > While it's not necessarily easier to understand for end users, I've > always found Prolog easy to understand, where OWL is more of a challenge. > > So what solutions are out there? I would prefer description logic > programming to OWL. Does Prolog-like backward-chaining make sense for > RDF? If so, how would it be combined with SPARQL; or would it replace > it? Or maybe something frame-based? > > Am I making sense? I would appreciate any pointers, hints and insights. > > Axel > > [1] http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/index.html#desc-merging > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: mhepp@computer.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= Webcast: http://www.heppnetz.de/projects/goodrelations/webcast/ Recipe for Yahoo SearcMonkey: http://tr.im/rAbN Talk at the Semantic Technology Conference 2009: "Semantic Web-based E-Commerce: The GoodRelations Ontology" http://tinyurl.com/semtech-hepp Overview article on Semantic Universe: http://tinyurl.com/goodrelations-universe Project page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ Resources for developers: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations Tutorial materials: CEC'09 2009 Tutorial: The Web of Data for E-Commerce: A Hands-on Introduction to the GoodRelations Ontology, RDFa, and Yahoo! SearchMonkey http://tr.im/grcec09
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 13:47:05 UTC