Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] to store ontologies
tredmond at stanford.edu
Tue Apr 3 11:17:21 PDT 2007
> Ø Jena API and Protege-OWL have the same purpose: load, save
> and query OWL, RDF ontologies ? If this statement is right, when
> should I use each one?
There are many similarities between the Jena API and the Protege-OWL
API. There are also many other contenders.
I think that one reason to seriously consider the Protege-OWL API is
that the Protege-OWL API is part of Protege. This allows you to do
many things like build an application as a tab in Protege, use
Protege to debug your application, use Protege plugins to help your
development etc. In addition, Protege OWL has many nice things like
server-client support and a database backend.
If none of the above tempt you to use Protege-OWL then I would
seriously consider Jena or the OWL API. One advantage of Jena in
this context is that it has a lot of support and it will allow you to
work with arbitrary RDF triples as well as OWL. In addition Jena
supports a database backend and I have heard that Jena can be made to
work with other existing triple store implementations.
An advantage of the OWL API is that it focusses on OWL. You don't
need to worry about triples and all that. It therefore has a very
elegant and simple interface. In addition it is the future of
Protege - in Protege 4 the api for accessing OWL ontologies will be
the OWL API rather than the current Protege-OWL API. But currently
the OWL API does not support a database backend or server-client mode.
As I said there are (infinitely?) many other contenders but the above
are the ones that I have the most experience with.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-owl