Complex in which sense? And about what kind of rules are you talking? And what is an ontology for you?
In Semantic Web, rules and ontologies work together and not independently. > Hello, > >> 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? > > i think, kumar's both questions together make sense. Ontologies + > Rules make the whole thing really very complex. > > My question: Is it a possible scenario to think a Semantic Web > environment controlled only by rules? > > thanks, baran > > ************** > > >> >> 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
