Semantic Web Interest Group IRC Scratchpad

Welcome to the Semantic Web Interest Group scratchpad generated automatically from discussions on IRC at Freenode channel #swig 2001-2018 approx by the chump bot.

Nearby: IRC logs | semantic-web list | W3C Wiki (Recent changes) | delicious swigbot

last updated at 2005-09-08 17:07
OWL editors and their underlying toolkits (triples or other)
bijanp: Protege uses internal format (and DIG to interact with remote reasoners]
bijanp: Triple20 uses triples directly. (So it is an OWL editor by editing the RDF triples of an OWL document)
EliasT: pOWL - Semantic Web Development Plattform
bijanp: I believe pOWL works on triples but don't know for sure.
bijanp: pOWL being a database based editor might be the best example for SPARQL.
bijanp: Swoop uses the OWL API, not triples
bijanp: OilEd I believe, with very good cause, to not use triples. It uses DIG to interact with remote reasoners.
bijanp: Note that Swoop, Protege, and OilEd all have a base vs. full inference mode
DanC: cf SPARQL use case 2.17 Building Ontology Tools
bijan: OntoTrack I believe and would be shocked if it used triples directly. It doens't have a "told" mode. All editing is done with full reasoning all the time.
bijan: Which, I've said to the authors, is nuts :)
bengee: afaik, pOWL uses RAP's persistence layer (which is statement-based)
bengee: OWLchestra uses a relational db for OWL models. (I managed to build a SKOS editor on top of an RDF store + API + SPARQL queries, not sure if that'd work for OWL as well, though...)
recent feedback on SPARQL
DanC: pfps's comments have lots of good examples
logger: See discussion
DanC: jos's msg on subgraph/entailment, including a prover9 proof of the OWL disjunction worker example
DanC: <timbl> It is not friendly to reply with two results, one of which entails the other.
DanC: the worker example in Enrico's msg from July 2004
DanC: definition of lean from RDF Semantics
EliasT: Triple20 -- An RDF/RDFS/OWL visualisation and editing tool
DanC: Enrico's comments ask for a SPARQL core with formal semantics exclude GRAPH/BOUND, which suggest re-opening the SOURCE and UNSAID issues.
DanC: The worker example seems to conflict with section 2.1 Specification of RDF Schema/OWL semantics of the DAWG charter, "if OWL DL semantics are supported by a service, that may be evident in the description of the service or the virtual graph which is queried, but it will not affect the protocol designed under this charter.'
Created by the Daily Chump bot. Hosted by PlanetRDF.