- From: Ignazio Palmisano <ipalmisano.mailings@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:44:28 +0100
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
2011/7/18 Markus Krötzsch <markus.kroetzsch@cs.ox.ac.uk>: > On 18/07/11 08:27, Cristiano Longo wrote: >> >> Morning all, >> in the far future I planned to implement a description logic reasoner. >> May you give me some hints or pointers about the pratical (I yet know >> the algorithm) for implementing such a reasoner? > > Dear Christian, > > description logics come in various flavours to match different application > areas. These different logics also match different profiles of OWL: OWL EL, > OWL QL, OWL RL, and OWL DL (there is also OWL Full but its semantics is not > description logics based though both are compatible to some extent). > > EL, QL, RL are more lightweight for better scalability (for example OWL RL > has been implemented in distributed settings with billions of assertions; > and EL has been used to classify ontologies with hundreds of thousands of > classes in a few seconds; QL is meant for ontology-based data access to > large databases). OWL DL provides the full modelling support of all DL > features that OWL has. Lightweight languages are generally easier to > implement but any efficient implementation will need a lot of engineering.. > Just implementing an algorithm from a research paper will not lead to good > results. > > So before you can start, you really need to decide which description > logic/OWL profile you want to support. This is closely related to another > important questions: why do you want to implement your own tool instead of > just using an existing one? Or contributing effort to / extending an existing reasoner; there is a number of open source ones available. HTH, I. > > Regards > > Markus > > -- > Dr. Markus Krötzsch > Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford > Room 306, Parks Road, OX1 3QD Oxford, United Kingdom > +44 (0)1865 283529 http://korrekt.org/ > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 06:35:29 UTC