W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Schism in the Semantic Web community.

From: Kannan Rajkumar <rajkumarkannan.trichy@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:25:28 +0530
Message-ID: <c1769f8c0901110655p1dc5e276uceccc2fd5c178d89@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Olivier Rossel" <datao@datao.net>
Cc: "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Dear Olivier

I fully agree with your comments.


Dr. Rajkumar Kannan
Associate Professor
Department of Computer Science
Bishop Heber College - Tiruchirappalli, India
Tel: 91 4312770136, Fax: 914312770293

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Olivier Rossel <datao@datao.net> wrote:

> I am currently having a look at new features available in OWL2 (thanks
> for property chains :).
> But I am quite frustrated to see that only OWLAPI handles OWL2 at the
> moment.
> No short-term plan for Jena to support it.
> No idea if Swoop or Protege3-OWL will ever be upgraded to support it.
> OWLAPI does not manage semantic web at the statement level.
> Jena was one of the few libraries to be both statement-based and
> concept-based.
> Basically, i would say that Jena was the only API to glue the RDF
> world and the OWL world together.
> And because of that, it had been adopted by developpers as a
> "one-size-fits-all" library.
> And by RDF database vendors as their API for their RDF storage system.
> This makes me wonder:
> What will happen in the next future?
> Will we see a schism between RDF tools, and OWL tools?
> Virtuoso vs OwlGres?
> I think it is good that the Semantic Web has always keeped that
> internal competition between statements
> and boxes. But if tools support is splitted, then what? Two
> communities? Mass storage vs inference? A crucial
> tools choice to make in any IT project? Then we are back in the vendor
> lock-in nightmare.
> Well, this is quite a rough reflexion.
> Please comment.
Received on Sunday, 11 January 2009 14:56:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:10 UTC