- From: Mark Wallace <mwallace@3SigmaResearch.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:05:57 -0400
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: Semantic Web at W3C <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi Dan, Good point about the OWL in FOAF. Also, as I feared my language may be inflammatory in a way I did not intend. You mention that "how you compute with that data is a pragmatic choice", and I agree. I guess the heart of my question is more about the processing than the language. I guess I am looking for examples of systems out there that are using the OWL distributed around the web for significant DL-reasoning. Do such systems crawl or use seeAlso? Examples using RDFS reasoning would also be similarly interesting. Again, they may well be there and I am just unaware of them. Thus the question. :-) -Mark Dan Brickley wrote: > On 15/4/09 14:41, Mark Wallace wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> In my experience (it may be too limited) I see a lot of "real RDF" on >> the web, especially in things like FOAF, and Dbpedia. But I am not aware >> of much "real OWL" on the web, and by this I mean OWL-DL ontologies and >> knowledge bases, embedded in web pages, and systems that reason over >> such information. Now I know many folks are hosting ontologies at HTTP >> URLs. This is not what I am talking about. I am thinking more of OWL-DL >> statements out there like FOAF is now, and systems that crawl (?) and >> reason over the combined knowledge. > > A quick comment - > Whenever people do identity reasoning with FOAF data (eg. Sindice, > Garlik/Qdos) this is reasoning using properties like foaf:homepage, > foaf:mbox etc whose semantics are documented using (real!) OWL. > Whether or not a general purpose OWL inference engine is used at > runtime is pretty secondary. OWL is a data formats standard, just as > RDF is - how you compute with that data is a pragmatic choice. Any > vocabulary or dataset (eg. DOAP, SIOC) that is mixed up with FOAF in > terms of linked classes and properties, is also partially documented > using OWL. So I guess I disagree with any attempt to contrast "real > world" FOAF / RDF deployment with "non-real" OWL deployment. Or with > the idea that the only real OWL work is OWL-DL... > > cheers, > > Dan > > -- > http://danbri.org/ >
Received on Wednesday, 15 April 2009 13:06:33 UTC