Re: Reasoning

2011/7/18 Markus Krötzsch <>:
> 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.

> 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     

Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 06:35:29 UTC