HI Adrian & all, yes, I can see your point and indeed, if a rule system was around, it may do the trick in simple cases. Another (non-exclusive) approach is what I briefly mentioned at the F2F: is the development of a kind of an intermediate layer between RDFS and OWL; a layer that would allow some extra information to be added to the knowledge base without forcing the usage of a DL reasoner. There are several approaches for this, and we (I mean, W3C) may want to look into this more closely next year...
Ivan Adrian Walker wrote: > Hi Ivan, Kerstin & All -- > > A quick thought about "you are a perfectly decent Semantic Web citizen > even if you do not use OWL". > > We have found that, even in rather simple cases, it's quite hard for a > programmer to check that inferences over RDF are producing correct results. > > An approach that we have found useful is to reason over RDF using rules > in executable, open vocabulary English. > > With this extra English semantics attached, we can have the system > explain, in English, at the business or scientific level, how it derived > a result. > > There's a simple example at > > > https://www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/RDFQueryLangComparison1.agent > > You can view, edit, and run the example (and others) by pointing a > browser to reengineeringllc.com <http://reengineeringllc.com> and > selecting the example RDFQueryLangComparison1 . > > HTH, -- Adrian > > > Internet Business Logic (R) > Executable open vocabulary English > Online at www.reengineeringllc.com <http://www.reengineeringllc.com> > Shared use is free > > Adrian Walker > Reengineering > Phone: USA 860 830 2085 > > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
