Simon, John and All ... I had an exchange with MartinHepp ref
GoodRelations just yesterday. (01)
I will post that to this list after tomorrow ... I'm sure some of you
will find that interesting. (02)
Regards. =ppy
-- (03)
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:18 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Simon,
>
> I did *not* say that Schema.org is OWL-based. GoodRelations used OWL,
> and Schema.org adopted GoodRelations but without all the OWL features.
> I used the I term "OWL-level", but I should have been more precise.
>
> JFS
>> But note that Schema.org contains a lot OWL-level specifications,
>> including the GoodRelations ontologies. That is the point I was
>> making in the following statement
>
> Simon
>> Schema.org does not use OWL; in some places it does use some parts of
>> rdfs, but not in a way that is easy to reason with. The data model is
>> described here: http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html
>
> I agree with that point. But as I have said many times, OWL hits the
> *sour spot* of knowledge representation. I like Schema.org because it
> has a good chance of weaning people *away from* OWL.
>
> As an example of the kinds of KR tools I would recommend, see the
> CEDAR system described below. I really want to see ontologies and
> logic-based systems succeed. But OWL is a dead-end system. The
> sooner we can provide better tools, the better our chances.
>
> John
> ___________________________________________________________________
>
> The following excerpt is from http://www.jfsowa.com/logic/sorts.pdf
>
> More recently, Amir and Aït-Kaci (2013) compared the CEDAR system,
> which an order-sorted logic (OSL) uses an OSL for classifying and
> querying very large taxonomies, to six OWL-based reasoners: Fact++,
> HermiT, Pellet, TrOWL, RacerPro, and SnoRocket. They compared them
> on four taxonomies that ranged in size from 111,559 sorts or classes
> (Wikipedia) to 903,617 sorts (NCBI).
>
> For classification, CEDAR was among the three fastest for all the
> taxonomies. On the Wikipedia taxonomy, it was five times faster than
> the second best (Fact++). For querying, CEDAR beat all the others by
> several orders of magnitude. The query time is the most important,
> since a classified CEDAR taxonomy can be saved and reused. CEDAR
> also detects cycles in the taxonomy, which are a serious source of
> inconsistencies.
>
> Amir, Samir, & Hassan Aït-Kaci (2013) Fast taxonomic reasoning based
> on lattice operations, CEDAR Technical Report No. 3, LIRIS-UFR
> d’Informatique. http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/papers/ctr3.pdf
>
> For related issues, see the three slide presentations by Hassan A-K:
>
> Is it possible to make the Semantic Web a reality?
> http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/papers/intis.pdf
>
> Reasoning and the Semantic web,
> http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/papers/ontoforum.pdf
>
> Empirical study of high-performance triple stores,
>
>http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/papers/Presentation_Cedar-PetaSky-LIP_ENS-Web-Site.pdf
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (04)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (05)
|