Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] OWLAPI or Jena

Timothy Redmond tredmond at stanford.edu
Mon Feb 23 10:14:04 PST 2009


> I want to stick with OWL
    ....
> Can you kindly refer me which framework should I use, OWLAPI or Jena  
> prvided that I have to use ontology in ubiquitous environment & it  
> will have to respond to dynamic contents.

This has to be a controversial question.  My answer will probably  
displease people on all sides of this issue.  There are actually many  
choices - you haven't included other triple stores, Protege 3 OWL,  
KAoN2, etc.  And I am sure that there are many that I am not listing.  
Confusing?

At a first cut, use the OWL API (owlapi.sourceforge.net).  It allows  
you to work with owl constructs at the right level of abstraction and  
it closely follows the OWL 2.0 standards.  It is becoming   
increasingly popular and is very powerful.

There are some reasons why you might consider not using the OWL API  
though.  It is still missing a few features, most notably a database  
backend.  So if you are developing a server which needs to be able to  
open large ontologies quickly and/or needs many ontologies open at the  
same time, this might be problematic.  You might also have trouble if  
your dataset is far too big to fit in memory.  But for most other uses  
the OWL API has a very good memory footprint and performs very well.   
Also we plan to add a database backend to the OWL API at some point so  
this might be just a matter of timing.  In addition, the OWL API does  
not have a client-server solution.  Another - less commonly desired  
outside of the Protege 3 client-server implementation - feature that  
the OWL API doesn't have is a client-server or distributed solution.   
There is a plan for a client-server owl api implementation but work  
hasn't started yet.  There is at least one group that started  
development of a project using the Protege 3 owl api because of the  
client server mode.  I don't know the status of this project though.

Unfortunately KAoN2  is probably basically dead.  It had some  
proprietary vs. open-source issues which have badly hurt it.   
Personally I think that this is very sad.

RDF based approaches such as Jena or even other triple stores form a  
very mature technology base.  In particular, there are several fast  
database implementations available.  There is also at least one client- 
server solution based on restful services (Sesame).  In my opinion,  
the disadvantage of using these is that RDF is at a very low level of  
abstraction for working with OWL.  While Jena, and some others, have  
tools to help bridge this gap between RDF and OWL, I think  that you  
will still see RDF in your work.  You may even be tempted to work with  
SPARQL queries which I believe is a mistake for OWL ontologies.  An  
interesting counter-case could probably be made by Holger Knublauch  
who chose Jena as the basis of his topbraid composer.  This choice  
made it easy for him to implement a database backend and a client- 
server solution (using Jena on top of Sesame).

Finally there is the Protege 3 OWL api.  I think that the main  
motivation for using this is that there is some feature of Protege 3  
that you need and can't find elsewhere.  I would suggest that you do  
try to look  elsewhere - particularly at Protege 4 which is based on  
the OWL api.  The Protege 3 OWL api is very powerful but has some  
arcane idiosyncrasies that are better avoided if you can.

-Timothy




On Feb 22, 2009, at 12:52 PM, babar shahzad wrote:

> Hi to all & thanK you Cedric,
>
> I want to stick with OWL as I have spent quite a bit part of my time  
> on it till now, sw port may be a good option to transfer data to C++  
> from Java.
>
> Can you kindly refer me which framework should I use, OWLAPI or Jena  
> prvided that I have to use ontology in ubiquitous environment & it  
> will have to respond to dynamic contents.
>
>
> Thanks you in advance for any kind of help
>
> Babar Shahzad Chaudary,
> +358408532112
> Deptt of Information Processing
> Science,
> University of Oulu, Finland.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Cedric Peeters <cedric.peeters at fundp.ac.be>
> To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor <protege-owl at mailman.stanford.edu 
> >
> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 2:48:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [protege-owl] Ontology in ubiquitus domain
>
>
> Hello Babar,
>
> I'm not aware of a library or a framework allowing to use ontology in
> C++ as Jena or OWLAPI can do in Java.
> I think you'll need to work in RDF instead of Ol if you want to use
> C++. Or could implement the ontology access with Java and then use JNI
> (or something else) to interact with you C++ application.
>
> I'll send you a link for showing you how ontologies are used in a  
> system.
>
> Regards,
>
> Cédric
>
>
>
>
> babar shahzad <babarathotmail at yahoo.com> a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Can anybody forward me a link which can have a bit detailed info
>> about how ontologies are used in a system, ubiquitous environment
>> preferably. I mean once we have developed an ontology, then
>> afterward how we use ontology to answer queries.
>> Almost all people I have seen here in protege forum asking problems
>> with Java applications, but I have to work in C++, so any related
>> source will be very helpful for me.
>>
>> Thank you in advance for any kind of help.
>>
>>
>> Babar Shahzad Chaudary,
>> +358408532112
>> Deptt of Information Processing
>> Science,
>> University of Oulu, Finland.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> protege-owl mailing list
>> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>>
>> Instructions for unsubscribing:
>> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03




More information about the protege-owl mailing list