W3C Tracking – OWL David De Roure GGF Semantic Grid Research Group www.semanticgrid.org/GGF.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 ISWC-2003 Sanibel Island, FL IMG, University of Manchester Jeff Z. Pan 1 and Ian Horrocks 1,2 {pan | 1 Information Management.
Advertisements

Three Theses of Representation in the Semantic Web
CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.
Semantic Web Thanks to folks at LAIT lab Sources include :
An Introduction to RDF(S) and a Quick Tour of OWL
Natural Language and Speech Processing Professor: Dr. Christel Kemke Winter 2004 Knowledge Representation on the Semantic Web by Femi G. Olumofin.
CS570 Artificial Intelligence Semantic Web & Ontology 2
SIG2: Ontology Language Standards WebOnt Briefing Ian Horrocks University of Manchester, UK.
Of 27 lecture 7: owl - introduction. of 27 ece 627, winter ‘132 OWL a glimpse OWL – Web Ontology Language describes classes, properties and relations.
OWL TUTORIAL APT CSA 3003 OWL ANNOTATOR Charlie Abela CSAI Department.
1 Semantic Web Technologies: The foundation for future enterprise systems Okech Odhiambo Knowledge Systems Research Group Strathmore University.
Ontology Notes are from:
Descriptions Robert Grimm New York University. The Final Assignment…  Your own application  Discussion board  Think: Paper summaries  Web cam proxy.
Ontology and Ontology-Based Applications C. Farkas Some of the slides were obtained from presentations of Ian Horrocks.
Semantic Web Tools for Authoring and Using Analysis Results Richard Fikes Robert McCool Deborah McGuinness Sheila McIlraith Jessica Jenkins Knowledge Systems.
COMP 6703 eScience Project Semantic Web for Museums Student : Lei Junran Client/Technical Supervisor : Tom Worthington Academic Supervisor : Peter Strazdins.
1 Copyright © 2005 Access Innovations, Inc. OWL Mapping Thesaurus Format NEXT GENERATION KNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATION SYSTEMS: INTEGRATION CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES.
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park 1 Sharath Srinivas - CMSC 818Z, Spring 2007 Semantic Web and Knowledge Representation.
OntoWeb SIG 2: Ontology Language Standards Heiner Stuckenschmidt Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam With contributions from: Ian Horrocks and Frank van Harmelen.
1 Technologies and Modelling Frameworks XML ontology RDF taxonomy OWL thesaurus Semantic Web.
Semantic Web Ontologies (continued) Expressing, Querying, Building CS 431 – April 6, 2005 Carl Lagoze – Cornell University.
Aidministrator nederland b.v. Adding formal semantics to the Web Jeen Broekstra, Michel Klein, Stefan Decker, Dieter Fensel,
Knowledge Representation Ontology are best delivered in some computable representation Variety of choices with different: –Expressiveness The range of.
Practical RDF Chapter 1. RDF: An Introduction
Of 39 lecture 2: ontology - basics. of 39 ontology a branch of metaphysics relating to the nature and relations of being a particular theory about the.
1 Representing Data with XML September 27, 2005 Shawn Henry with slides from Neal Arthorne.
OWL and SDD Dave Thau University of Kansas
OWL Capturing Semantic Information using a Standard Web Ontology Language Aditya Kalyanpur Jennifer Jay Banerjee James Hendler Presented By Rami Al-Ghanmi.
Dept. Computer Science, Korea Univ. Intelligent Information System Lab. 1 Sohn Jong-Soo Intelligent Information System lab. Department of Computer Science.
OWL 2 in use. OWL 2 OWL 2 is a knowledge representation language, designed to formulate, exchange and reason with knowledge about a domain of interest.
Chapter 9. 9 RDFS (RDF Schema) RDFS Part of the Ontological Primitive layer Adds features to RDF Provides standard vocabulary for describing concepts.
Michael Eckert1CS590SW: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Web Ontology Language (OWL) CS590SW: Semantic Web (Winter Quarter 2003) Presentation: Michael Eckert.
Ontology & OWL Semantic Web - Fall 2005 Computer Engineering Department Sharif University of Technology.
Semantic Web - an introduction By Daniel Wu (danielwujr)
Advanced topics in software engineering (Semantic web)
EEL 5937 Ontologies EEL 5937 Multi Agent Systems Lecture 5, Jan 23 th, 2003 Lotzi Bölöni.
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
SKOS. Ontologies Metadata –Resources marked-up with descriptions of their content. No good unless everyone speaks the same language; Terminologies –Provide.
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Ontology
DAML+OIL: an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web.
The future of the Web: Semantic Web 9/30/2004 Xiangming Mu.
Semantic Web Ontologies CS 431 – Carl Lagoze – Cornell University Acknowledgements: Alun Preece.
OWL-based Semantic Conflicts Detection and Resolution for Data Interoperability Changqing Li,Tok Wang Ling Department of Computer Science School of Computing.
OIL and DAML+OIL: Ontology Languages for the Semantic Web Sungshin Lim TOWARDS THE SEMANTIC WEB: Ontology-driven Knowledge.
Organization of the Lab Three meetings:  today: general introduction, first steps in Protégé OWL  November 19: second part of tutorial  December 3:
Metadata : an overview XML and Educational Metadata, SBU, London, 10 July 2001 Pete Johnston UKOLN, University of Bath Bath, BA2 7AY UKOLN is supported.
OWL & Protege Introduction Dongfang Xu Ph.D student, School of Information, University of Arizona Sept 10, 2015.
The Semantic Web Riccardo Rosati Dottorato in Ingegneria Informatica Sapienza Università di Roma a.a. 2006/07.
Representing Data with XML February 26, 2004 Neal Arthorne.
Practical RDF Chapter 12. Ontologies: RDF Business Models Shelley Powers, O’Reilly SNU IDB Lab. Taikyoung Kim.
The Semantic Web and Ontology. The Semantic Web WWW: –syntactic transmission of information –only processible by human – no semantic conservation of the.
A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action Jeff Heflin and James Hendler IEEE Intelligent Systems December 6, 2010 Hyewon Lim.
Stefan Decker Stanford University Mike Dean BBN Technologies.
W3C’s (world wide web consortium) Semantic Web: - RDF and metadata markup efforts to represent data in a machine understandable form. DARPA started the.
06 Dec Rev. 14 Dec CmpE 583 Fall 2008 OWL Language 1 OWL Language off Lacy Ch. 10 Atilla Elçi.
Web Ontology Language (OWL). OWL The W3C Web Ontology Language (OWL) is a Semantic Web language designed to represent rich and complex knowledge about.
OWL Web Ontology Language Summary IHan HSIAO (Sharon)
An Introduction and UML Profile for the Web Ontology Language (OWL) October 23, 2002 Elisa F. KendallMark E. Dutra CEO & FounderChief Architect
Ccs.  Ontologies are used to capture knowledge about some domain of interest. ◦ An ontology describes the concepts in the domain and also the relationships.
Chapter 8A Semantic Web Primer 1 Chapter 8 Conclusion and Outlook Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen.
Semantic Web. P2 Introduction Information management facilities not keeping pace with the capacity of our information storage. –Information Overload –haphazardly.
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
Building Trustworthy Semantic Webs
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
OWL Language off Textbook Ch. 10
Semantic Web Lecture Notes Prepared by Jagdish S. Gangolly
Ontology.
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Ontology.
Presentation transcript:

W3C Tracking – OWL David De Roure GGF Semantic Grid Research Group

GGF7 Tokyo March XML+RDF Basics URI - Uniform Resource Identifier XML - eXtensible Markup Language XML Namespaces XML Schema RDF - Resource Description Framework RDF Schema

GGF7 Tokyo March Resource Description Framework

GGF7 Tokyo March Not Rocket Science “Is this rocket science? Well, not really. The Semantic Web, like the World Wide Web, is just taking well established ideas, and making them work interoperability over the Internet. This is done with standards, which is what the World Wide Web Consortium is all about. We are not inventing relational models for data, or query systems or rule-based systems. We are just webizing them. We are just allowing them to work together in a decentralized system - without a human having to custom handcraft every connection.” -- Tim Berners-Lee, Business Case for the Semantic Web,

GGF7 Tokyo March Jargon interop In science, models provide interoperability across jargons –Mathematical models: equations of a system –Physical models: “sticks and balls” of the atom –Virtual models: the visualization of a complex data set –INFORMATION MODELS: taxonomies and thesauri

GGF7 Tokyo March Ontologies Ontologies extend thesaurus information models to provide –Semantic restrictions on property relations Must have vs. May have vs. Doesn’t have Has some vs. has N vs. has 1 Some vs. All property restrictions –Formal underpinnings Note: rules, logics, proofs are parts of ontologies, but not yet at a “consensus” level for standardization

GGF7 Tokyo March RDFS The Resource Description Framework (RDF) was the first language specified by the W3C for representing semantic information about arbitrary resources. RDF Schema (RDFS) is a W3C candidate recommendation for an extension to RDF to describe RDF vocabularies. RDFS can be used to create ontologies, but it is purposefully lightweight, with less expressive power than OWL.

GGF7 Tokyo March Other ontology efforts DAML - DARPA Agent Markup Language DAML-ONT MCF - Meta Content Framework. Ontobroker On-To-Knowledge OIL - Ontology Inference Layer SHOE - Simple HTML Ontology Extensions XOL

GGF7 Tokyo March DAML+OIL Researchers, including many of the main participants in both the OIL and DAML-ONT efforts, got together in the Joint US/EU ad hoc Agent Markup Language Committee to create a new web ontology language This language DAML+OIL built on both OIL and DAML-ONT, was submitted to the W3C as a proposed basis for OWL, and was subsequently selected as the starting point for OWL

GGF7 Tokyo March DAML+OIL uptake DAML+OIL is already the most used ontology language in history –Sept 30, 02: Crawler finds 5M+ DAML statements on 20,000+ web pages Doesn’t include many instance KBs tied to ontologies Doesn’t include many very large RDFS-based KBs that include some OWL –OWL is being supported by large corporation labs Web tool developers: IBM, HP, Sun, Intel, Fujitsu Content providers: Daimler-Chrysler, Nokia, Motorola, EDS, Agfa –OWL is starting to be used by thesaurus distributors C.f. National Cancer Institute metathesaurus to be released in OWL

GGF7 Tokyo March OWL Web Ontology Language OWL

GGF7 Tokyo March OWL Extends RDF RDF-schema –Class, subclass –Property, subproperty + Restrictions –Range, domain –Local, global –Existential –Cardinality + Combinators Union, Intersection Complement Symmetric, transitive + Mapping Equivalence Inverse

GGF7 Tokyo March OWL is not OWL is not a “knowledge representation language” per se –Definitely not “The standard: for KR” OWL is not a “Description Logic” per se –It does support DL “idioms” E.g. “Lymphoma” is restricted to be a subClassOf those things whose “disease” property is “Cancer” –It includes a “subset” which is complete, and decidable –But, it will allow uses that DLs do not

GGF7 Tokyo March OWL Documents Web Ontology Language (OWL) Guide Version 1.0, W3C Working Draft, 26 February 2003 Requirements for a Web Ontology Language. W3C Working Draft, 08 July Feature Synopsis for OWL Lite and OWL. Deborah L. McGuinness and Frank van Harmelen. W3C Working Draft, 29 Jul OWL Web Ontology Language 1.0 Reference. Mike Dean and Guus Schreiber. W3C Working Draft, 3 February OWL Web Ontology Language 1.0 Abstract Syntax. Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Ian Horrocks, and Frank van Harmelen. W3C Working Draft 29 July Model-Theoretic Semantics for OWL, Peter F. Patel- Schneider, Partick Hayes, and Ian Horrocks. 3 February 2003

GGF7 Tokyo March OWL Guide This document demonstrates the use of the OWL language to –formalize a domain by defining classes and properties of those classes, –define individuals and assert properties about them, and –reason about these classes and individuals to the degree permitted by the formal semantics of the OWL language.

GGF7 Tokyo March The Species of OWL OWL Lite supports those users primarily needing a classification hierarchy and simple constraint features. It should be simpler to provide tool support for OWL Lite than its more expressive relatives, and provides a quick migration path for thesauri and other taxonomies.

GGF7 Tokyo March The Species of OWL OWL DL supports those users who want the maximum expressiveness without losing computational completeness and decidability of reasoning systems. OWL DL was designed to support the existing Description Logic business segment.

GGF7 Tokyo March The Species of OWL OWL Full is meant for users who want maximum expressiveness and the syntactic freedom of RDF with no computational guarantees. It allows an ontology to augment the meaning of the pre-defined (RDF or OWL) vocabulary.

GGF7 Tokyo March Expressiveness OWL Lite supports cardinality constraints, but it only permits cardinality values of 0 or 1. In OWL DL, a class cannot also be an individual or property, a property can not also be an individual or class. In OWL Full a class can be treated simultaneously as a collection of individuals and as an individual in its own right.

GGF7 Tokyo March See some OWL! Fragments from the Wine Ontology example in the OWL Guide…

GGF7 Tokyo March Namespaces <rdf:RDF xmlns = xmlns:vin = xmlns:food= xmlns:owl =" xmlns:rdf = xmlns:rdfs= xmlns:xsd ="

GGF7 Tokyo March Ontology header An example OWL ontology Wine Ontology...

GGF7 Tokyo March Simple classes wine vin...

GGF7 Tokyo March Tools Being able to express ontologies is not enough…we need tools! Existing tools, especially DAML+OIL, are adapting to OWL Available for use in the lifetime of this group

GGF7 Tokyo March

GGF7 Tokyo March Conclusions OWL is more expressive than RDF(S) OWL evolved from DAML+OIL There are three species of OWL OWL nearing completion and documents are available See OWL Guide for examples Tools are increasingly available

GGF7 Tokyo March Acknowledgements These slides are primarily based on the OWL Guide and on a presentation by Jim Hender