On Jul 16, 2007, at 5:53 PM, Eric Jain wrote:
Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
We've got a SW language for making definitions - it's called OWL.
One thing I can say here is that there is the trend that curators
create rules (and check the outcome) instead of adding data
themselves directly. Unfortunately OWL is insufficient for the kind
of ugly rules they need to create; maybe SWRL will allow us to
distribute at least part of the rules.
[snip]
Eric, I would be very much interested in some more details about the
sort of rules used and how they are used. I personally tend to
distinguish between the use of rules in modeling and the use of rules
for data munging tasks. Obviously, where you draw this boundary can
be a matter of taste and situation, but it seems to be a useful
distinction. It's unclear to me where the rules you describe fall.
There is some effort coming out of OWLED 2007 to improve the
infrastructure situation (from implementation to documentation) with
regard to rules and OWL, so any information you can give on use
patterns and needs would be very helpful. (Also, C&P has a summer
intern working on rule support in Pellet and having real uses would
be nicely motivating :)).
Cheers,
Bijan.
