Re: OWL reasoning in rules

• From: Matt Williams <matthew.williams@cancer.org.uk>
• Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 11:48:31 +0100
• To: Ulrike Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
• CC: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
• Message-ID: <4656BEFF.2000603@cancer.org.uk>

Dear Ian, Ulrike & Bijan,

Thank you so much for your speedy & comprehensive replies. To clarify, I 
was indeed talking about using a rules engine to do OWL reasoning; 
Bijan, you're right about the imprecision of what a "rule" is (and I'm 
not clear, either. The work I'm doing at the moment uses very simple 
horn-clause rules with variables that are unified with terms from the 
ABox). Also, the distinction between data-heavy and axiom heavy reasoning.

The reason it came up was a) because it seems to be a perennial problem 
and b) there seem to be some existing techniques (like backward 
chaining) that I can't immediately see how one would implement when your 
data is the ABox of an ontology.

Thanks a lot,

Matt

Received on Friday, 25 May 2007 10:48:44 UTC