I've been recently reading up on OWL and some of the topics related to
the Semantic Web. It seems though that while OWL became an official
recommendation a while back, there isn't much use of it outside of the
research world. (i.e. sample implementation reasoners, parsers, etc
but no higher level apps built on the underlying facilities OWL might
provide)
As I read the recommendation on OWL, a lot of its structure seemed like
Prolog and normal propositional logic, with extra extensions for the
notions of object-orientation and classes, wrapped up in XML. I
haven't seen any references to this other material though, so I'm left
to believe that either it doesn't apply (and hence pointers to
resources on learning that material wouldn't be helpful, because there
wouldn't be any carry-over) or the community just hasn't built itself
yet.
One thought that crossed my mind was that it might be unrealistic for
web publishers to publish ontologies related to their subject material
when they don't even know what an ontology is, how to use it, or how to
write one. Meanwhile, visions of "the semantic web" dance in our
heads. (Oh yeah, and sugarplums as well)
Searching this group has yielded only a few messages on OWL - am I in
the wrong place (there doesn't seem to be a group devoted to OWL) or I
am just noticing the conspicuous chirping of crickets?
Is there any moving and/or shaking going on in the world of OWL?
the Semantic Web. It seems though that while OWL became an official
recommendation a while back, there isn't much use of it outside of the
research world. (i.e. sample implementation reasoners, parsers, etc
but no higher level apps built on the underlying facilities OWL might
provide)
As I read the recommendation on OWL, a lot of its structure seemed like
Prolog and normal propositional logic, with extra extensions for the
notions of object-orientation and classes, wrapped up in XML. I
haven't seen any references to this other material though, so I'm left
to believe that either it doesn't apply (and hence pointers to
resources on learning that material wouldn't be helpful, because there
wouldn't be any carry-over) or the community just hasn't built itself
yet.
One thought that crossed my mind was that it might be unrealistic for
web publishers to publish ontologies related to their subject material
when they don't even know what an ontology is, how to use it, or how to
write one. Meanwhile, visions of "the semantic web" dance in our
heads. (Oh yeah, and sugarplums as well)
Searching this group has yielded only a few messages on OWL - am I in
the wrong place (there doesn't seem to be a group devoted to OWL) or I
am just noticing the conspicuous chirping of crickets?
Is there any moving and/or shaking going on in the world of OWL?
Comment