But then your second question is not clear. Rules directly encode inferences which can be aplpied by a rule engine whereas with any RDF API application code you would to do it for each rule separately.
> Hello Lorenz, I just know rules are used to infer new triples based on > existed knowledge. > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Lorenz B. < > buehm...@informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote: > >> Do you understand the different between rules used for inference and RDF >> which contains asserted data? >> >>> Thanks all for explanation. >>> >>> I still need some explanation. What is the advantage of using ontology in >>> our semantic web application. Its just that we can share it? >>> >>> Second, what is the advantage of Jena rules? A task completed with an RDF >>> API and same task with Jena rules, why people prefer rules? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 11:28 AM, <baran...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Adrian, i think this is a rather old and not yet fully developed >>>> application with a UI needing a bit freshing up for smoothly working, >>>> databases are (I tried with commodities1/2) also old and rather small. >> Is >>>> gold no commodity? if i put a question with an agent the effect is only >>>> reordering the list of general questions. My suggestion is: Let at >> first as >>>> input for an agent not only questions but also the option of a single >> item >>>> and then give a list of possible questions the agent can answer exactly >> for >>>> this item. May be i couldn't get everything so how it is meant... >>>> >>>> But the idea as whole has some original aspects, that was really what i >>>> meant: Trying away from heavy classical view of SPARQL databases >> connected >>>> to certain ontologies with a lot of small surprising error effects in >>>> developement, so that people ask: Why dont you make a simple SQL >> database, >>>> you talk then about Semantic Web, Linked Data basing on triples and >> URI's >>>> and of course about public endpoints. Then comes the question: 'public' >>>> endpoints with this performance where SPARQL only an adapted SQL for >>>> triples is? etc... >>>> >>>> I think you could next fresh up your concept if you have time for it, >> the >>>> other question is how it would react under heavy usage... This is my >>>> comment after 20 minutes, sorry that i had not much more time... >>>> >>>> ********** >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 07:05:54 +0100, Adrian Walker < >> adriandwal...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Baran, >>>>> You wrote: >>>>> *This means downsizing the whole thing to a simplified kernel for a >>>>> special >>>>> application field.* >>>>> Here's a simplified kernel that arguably covers wider version of >>>>> application semantics than the usual "semantic web" tools. >>>>> >>>>> Here's a summary slide: >>>>> >>>>> www.executable-english.com/internet_business_logic_in_a_ >> nutshell.pdf >>>>> The system that supports this is live, online at >>>>> www.executable-english.com. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Shared use is free, and there are no advertisements. Nothing to >> download, >>>>> just point a browser to the site. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for comments, -- Adrian >>>>> >>>>> Adrian Walker >>>>> Reengineering LLC >>>>> San Jose, CA, USA >>>>> 860 830 2085 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:33 AM, <baran...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 18:02:46 +0100, David Jordan < >>>>>> jdavidjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree that have some discussion about this is very useful. Many of >> us >>>>>>> have tried to evangelize semantic web technologies in our >> organizations >>>>>>> and > have struggled and failed because we cannot provide sufficient >>>>>>> justification for using the technology. Hearing the specific value >>>>>>> provided that can convince the skeptics is extremely valuable, much >> more >>>>>>> valuable >>>>>>> than simple support questions about a particular API interface. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> yes, i thing similar things, also like others responding to this >> thread >>>>>> in >>>>>> an open minded way... >>>>>> >>>>>> But i also want to describe something for the future: >>>>>> >>>>>> I imagine, a cheekily developer constructs a small, easily >> understandable >>>>>> and effectively implementable 'subset' of the whole thing 'Semantic >> Web' >>>>>> defining a new playing field or making great progress in usual apps of >>>>>> today. >>>>>> >>>>>> This cold be the realisation of TBL cit. (about 20 years ago?): 'The >> most >>>>>> exciting things about Semantic Web is not what we can imagine to do >> with >>>>>> it, but we can't yet imagine it will do.' >>>>>> >>>>>> First step is always a very simple and comprehensible idea.. This >> means >>>>>> downsizing the whole thing to a simplified kernel for a special >>>>>> application >>>>>> field... Better late than never... >>>>>> >>>>>> This is really what i instinctively think about this stuff after so >> many >>>>>> years. I know, such things are totally off topic for Jena team, but my >>>>>> posting is for 2 or 3 users who can be interested, if it is allowed... >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks, baran. >>>>>> >>>>>> ************ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10/02/17 12:22, kumar rohit wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, what are the benefits of semantic web technologies? I have used >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> semantic web technologies from one year but, in theory I am not >> sure >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> real advantages of semantic web. >>>>>>>>> When we develop a system using traditional RDBMS and Java and same >>>>>>>>> system >>>>>>>>> we develop using Java/Jena Protege SPARQL etc, so what is the >>>>>>>>> advantage >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> the latter application? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >>>> >> -- >> Lorenz Bühmann >> AKSW group, University of Leipzig >> Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center >> >> -- Lorenz Bühmann AKSW group, University of Leipzig Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center