Re: OWL vs RDF from Phillip Lord on 2006-10-27 (public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org from October 2006)

From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:54:12 +0100
To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Message-ID: <ulkn2owq3.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk>

>>>>> "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

Received on Friday, 27 October 2006 10:54:30 UTC