- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:57:02 -0400 (EDT)
- To: nvdesai@ncsu.edu
- Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
From: nvdesai@ncsu.edu Subject: Re: swrl.owl is OWL Full and Protege does not support OWL/XML Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:21:06 -0400 (EDT) > > Peter and Ian, > > Thanks for clarifying your takes on this. > > As most of the tools use Jena for parsing purposes, its Jena that will > need an update to handle OWL XML in case of deprecation. > > Till then, swrl.owl is the only option to develop something serious. I remain puzzled as to how swrl.owl even plays into the Jena parsing situation. It is not as if swrl.owl defines the semantics or even the syntax of SWRL. > BTW, is a new version of SWRL/SWRLX due anytime soon ? Probably not, i.e., no. :-) > Is there a page > where users can track the activities ? http://www.daml.org/rules/ is the most authoritative page on SWRL > thanks again, > > -Nirmit peter
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2004 21:50:35 UTC