Brief overview of the On-To-Knowledge project, including info about SHOE
incorporation into OIL (the Ontology-based Inference Layer) for
Ontology-based Tools for Knowledge Management.
"The use of OIL is currently evaluated in two running IST projects
On-To-Knowledge and Ibrow
(http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/projects/ibrow/home.html). In
On-To-Knowledge, OIL will be extended to a full-fledged environment for
knowledge management in large intranets and websites. Unstructured and
semi-structured data will be automatically annotated, and agent-based
user interface techniques and visualization tools will help the user to
navigate and query the information space. Here, On-To-Knowledge
continues a line of research that was set up with SHOE and Ontobroker
[5]: using ontologies to model and annotate the semantics of information
resources in a machine-processable manner."
http://www.ontoknowledge.org/countd/countdown.cgi?otk.pdf
"John J. Deneen" wrote:
> In any event, I believe the design of our "viewer engine" has to have
> some sort of intelligence for searching by using ontologies as the
> techical backbone for the various tasks of information integration and
> mediation. This is explained by important conclusions drawn from the
> following research projects and papers:
>
> * Tim Berners-Lee's Semantic Web Road map. This document gives a
> road map - a sequence for the incremental introduction of
> technology to take us, step by step, from the Web of today to a
> Web in which machine reasoning will be ubiquitous and
> devastatingly powerful.
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html
>
> * OntoWeb - Ontology-based information exchange for knowledge
> management and electronic commerce
> http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ying/OntoWeb
>
> * On-To-Knowledge - recent state-of-the-art reports: Information
> Extraction & Representation and Query Languages for
> Semistructured Data
> http://www.ontoknowledge.org/countd/countdown.cgi?OTK-EnerSearch-10May2000.ppt
> http://www.ontoknowledge.org/downl/del5.pdf
> http://www.ontoknowledge.org/countd/countdown.cgi?draftdel8.pdf
>
>
> Conclusions from the "Representation and Query Languages for
> Semistructured Data" paper says:
>
> "In chapter 1 we concluded that RDF was to be preferred as a
> representation language over XML. The main reason for this is that RDF
> explicitly commits to specific ontological modelling primitives,
> whereas XML only provides syntactic constructions without any
> ontological commitments. The choice for RDF also aligns the
> On-To-Knowledge project with the W3C initiatives related to
> the Semantic Web, and with the choices made in the recently started
> DARPA funded research programme DAML. This choice for RDF as the
> data-representation language immediately rules out any of the
> XML-based query-languages (since we required that the query-language
> should closely fit to the underlying data-model). Of the RDF
> query-languages known to us at the time of writing, RQL seems by far
> the most promising candidate, and fulfills most if not all of our
> requirements. One proviso must be made with this choice: RQL firmly
> commits to the RDF/RDF-Schema data model. This is of course as
> required, but also implies a limitation: any extensions to the RDF
> data-model (as is the intended use of RDF-Schema) cannot be directly
> queried in RQL. Consider for example the case of OIL: it extends the
> basic RDF/RDF-Schema model with new primitives (e.g. cardinality
> constraints). Such new elements in the data-model can only be included
> in a syntactic way in RQL queries, but the RQL query language is not
> able to process the semantics of such new primitives. Three
> alternatives exist as a way out of this dilemma:
>
>
> * define a language which allows for some kind of ifsemantic
> plug-in definitionsls, in order include the semantics of such
> schema-extensions into the query language
> * implement a new or extended query-language for each extension of
> the data-model
> * write a query-compiler wich compiles queries for the extended
> language into a set of queries for the original language.
>
> Our choice for RQL as the query-language in the On-To-Knowledge
> architecture implies that we recommend the third of these options."
>
>
>
> Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, John J. Deneen wrote:
>>
>> > So in regards to the "viewing engine", SHOE is a small extension
>> to HTML which
>> > allows web page authors to annotate their web documents with
>> machine-readable
>> > knowledge. SHOE makes real intelligent agent software on the web
>> possible.
>>
>> Just to keep things clear, the "viewing engine" is a human viewing
>> engine. As has been mentioned before, metacontent is an important
>> aspect
>> of the system, and SHOE may very well be an integral part of how we
>> do
>> that. Additionally, metacontent could certainly affect different
>> views. And we certainly want to make sure that machines can view
>> our
>> data, just as humans, although I suspect that we can just send
>> machines
>> raw XML rather than put it through any transformation. However, for
>> the
>> immediate purposes of designing the first version of the viewing
>> engine, I
>> don't think SHOE holds much relevance.
>>
>> -Eugene
>>
>> --
>> +=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== eekim@eekim.com =====
>> http://www.eekim.com/ ===+
>> | "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so
>> they |
>> +===== can have an excuse to drink alcohol." --Steve Martin
>> ===========+
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:57:49 PDT