W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > November 2003

Re: here's a list of companies/organizations potentially interested Re: Rules WG -- draft charter

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 06:45:50 -0500
To: Minsu Jang <minsu@etri.re.kr>
Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
Message-ID: <20031108114550.GB29239@w3.org>

Hi

* Minsu Jang <minsu@etri.re.kr> [2003-11-08 14:26+0900]
 
> Hi,
> 
> I would like to inform you that we also have much interest in rules
> aspects of the semantic web.

Thanks, that's good to know!

> In our research institute, ETRI, saveral projects were initiated to
> research and develop technologies
> for applying web ontologies and rules to the real problems of electronic
> commerce, distributed
> knowledge processing, natural language processing, semantic seraching
> etc.

This sounds like interesting work. Is more information available? (in 
English?). We are gathering evidence about the maturity of 
such technologies, so 'real world' studies are particularly valuable,
particularly those that combine Web Ontology (OWL) and rule approaches 
to solve some practical problem.

> We have put much effort in  following the development phases of OWL and
> RuleML, and 
> have just started to produce some interesting results - tools and
> frameworks etc.
> 
> Here's a showcase of our results.
> 
> - Bossam rule engine: a forward-chaining rule engine which supports OWL
> importing and inferencing.

Sounds very interesting. Is this available anywhere yet?
What are the (expected) licensing terms?

> - OWLer: an OWL inference system. It uses JTP for inferencing.
> - ezOWL: a Protege plugin for visual editing of OWL documents.
> - MOA: a merging tool for merging multiple OWL ongologies.
> - Buchingae: a web-friendly rule language. not XML-based.
> - LogicML: a rule markup language, which is a slight extension of
> RuleML's hornlog.

...same question as above! Where/when can we find out more? 

(I had a look around http://www.etri.re.kr/ but my monolinguality was a
problem...)
 

> I'm a developer in charge of Bossam rule engine, and have announced OWL
> test results of Bossam at public-webont-comments list.

Aha http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Nov/0002.html

...with lots more info: http://machine-knows.etri.re.kr/bossam/

> Well, this mail sort of reads like an advertisement, and it really is. 

:)  That's good! This list was created so folks could share their experiences 
building and deploying such systems, and to collaborate on
interoperability between them. So it is perfectly fine to tell everyone 
what you've been working on.

I notice in http://machine-knows.etri.re.kr/bossam/download/download.html that
the engine isn't public yet. Do you have a sense for when it will be
available, or expectations about likely license terms? (opensource would
be great...)

A technical question (for everyone, really): 
The Web Ontology WG spent a lot of time and energy 
on the delicate balance between OWL DL and OWL Full. Do you have any
findings from your implementation work that would help us estimate the 
impact of this aspect of OWL on any future Rules standardisation? Is 
it feasible to keep both traditions/approaches/communities happy within
a single "OWL-compatible" rules language? 

BTW http://machine-knows.etri.re.kr/bossam/docs/owlinference.html doesn't 
explicitly mention OWL DL vs Full or Lite. Which flavour(s) are you
targetting?


> I wanted to announce that
> there's one more research organization you might think of as supporting
> W3C semantic web activity and having interests in Rules WG. ;-)
> 
> Thanks for reading,

Thanks for writing,

cheers,

Dan
Received on Saturday, 8 November 2003 06:46:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:46:16 UTC