Re: OWL vs RDF

[William Bug]

This is a very important point.  Thanks, Phil. As is spelled out in the wonderful ProtegeOWL Tutorial PDF (which would be wonderful to have updated a bit), leaning on the reasoner during early phases of ontology construction is very helpful, but ultimately once you have more "hardened" components, you can "save" the inferred graph and distribute that for the user community. Cheers, Bill On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:54 AM, Phillip Lord wrote: "Robert" == Robert Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:   Robert> There's another answer of using the reasoner by building   Robert> your ontology to take advantage of its capabilities. the   Robert> conceptual lego approach relies on the reasoner. Incidentally, Robert's point reminded me of another thing you can do without a reasoner.  You can use your reasoner to build your ontology, and then deploy it without. One of the main reasons that people don't like DL reasoners s the overhead that they add to architectures. I think that this is a reasonable point but, in general, only at deployment time. When building your ontology, it's not that much hassle to have a reasoner -- my experience suggests it saves your more time than it costs you.  Phil Bill Bug Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics www.neuroterrain.org Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy Drexel University College of Medicine 2900 Queen Lane Philadelphia, PA    19129 215 991 8430 (ph) 610 457 0443 (mobile) 215 843 9367 (fax) Please Note: I now have a new email - [EMAIL PROTECTED]