[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] API4KB and diverse ontologies

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 09:34:41 -0400
Message-id: <51CEE271.1000403@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 6/29/2013 8:19 AM, Ray Martin wrote:
> I am trying to understand the similarities and differences between
> API4KB and Apache Stanbol. If I select the mechanisms of one project
> will the difficulties of using the other framework be insurmountable?    (01)

Good question.    (02)

Since the API4KB files are password protected, I can't say anything
about it beyond the slides.  But Apache has various projects that
were started by various groups and donated to the Apache Foundation
after they were fairly well developed.    (03)

 From Wikipedia:
> Apache Stanbol is an open source modular software stack and reusable
> set of components for semantic content management. Apache Stanbol
> components are meant to be accessed over RESTful interfaces to
> provide semantic services for content management. Thus, one
> application is to extend traditional content management systems
> with (internal or external) semantic services.    (04)

 From https://stanbol.apache.org/
> Functionalities are provided as RESTful services returning results
> as RDF (Resource Description Language) and JSON. Apache Stanbol
> also supports the use of JSON-LD.    (05)

The term 'semantic services' suggests logic, but the quotation above
indicates that they don't go beyond RDF and JSON in expressive power.
Since the API4KB slides show that they're interested in reasoning,
they should have more expressive power.    (06)

But I get *very uneasy* when anybody starts to talk about reasoning
and does not say anything about logic.  In the DAML proposal of 2000,
Tim B-L presented SWeLL as a highly expressive foundational logic
(superset of propositional logic, FOL, and HOL).  Hayes and Guha
designed LBase in 2003 as a logical foundation consistent with both
Tim's SWeLL and Common Logic.    (07)

That could have been (and still could be) the foundation for all
of these components.  I have no complaints about a multiplicity
of different APIs that are tailored for each kind of syntax.
But they should all be related to a common semantics.    (08)

John    (09)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (010)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>