Comments on: 5 Best Semantic Web Tools http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/ Make lots of money through stealth in shadows Sat, 11 Oct 2008 01:27:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-3783 Bijan Parsia Thu, 01 Mar 2007 15:33:16 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-3783 zzpaul, You might look at some of the demo <a href="http://www.mindswap.org/2004/SWOOP/media/" rel="nofollow">demo movies</a> which, while quite old, should give you some idea. Cheers, Bijan. zzpaul,

You might look at some of the demo demo movies which, while quite old, should give you some idea.

Cheers,
Bijan.

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-3779 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 09:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-3779 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically. For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8516 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8516 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.<br><br>For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8417 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8417 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.<br><br>For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8392 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8392 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.<br><br>For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8352 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8352 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.<br><br>For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: zzpaul http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8120 zzpaul Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:42:05 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8120 Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.<br><br>For SWOOP, I can't find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you! Hi, I am a beginner on ontology/semantic web. I have tried using Protege. I found it pretty good. It is quite easy to learn and use and I like the OntViz that displays an ontology graphically.

For SWOOP, I can’t find any tutorial on it. It makes me hard to learn. Do you all know where can I find some tutorials on it? Thank you!

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-47 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 04:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-47 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals. Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent). Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;) Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8515 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8515 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.<br><br>Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).<br><br>Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;)<br><br>Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8416 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8416 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.<br><br>Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).<br><br>Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;)<br><br>Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8391 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8391 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.<br><br>Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).<br><br>Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;)<br><br>Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8351 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8351 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.<br><br>Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).<br><br>Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;)<br><br>Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Bijan Parsia http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8119 Bijan Parsia Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:57:01 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8119 FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It's ABox support is weak though and it doesn't (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.<br><br>Pellet does not (yet) support *qualified* cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).<br><br>Re: Protege over SWOOP...what can I say, when you're wrong you're wrong ;)<br><br>Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I'm biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.) FaCT++ is actually now all of SHOIN, thus (depending on datatype support) all of OWL-DL. It’s ABox support is weak though and it doesn’t (yet) have any optimizations for nominals.

Pellet does not (yet) support qualified cardinality, alas. Soon we hope. Pellet does support nominals with a lot of optimizations and nice ABox support (including conjunctive query). Not to mention all the debugging features (though some of them are reasoner independent).

Re: Protege over SWOOP…what can I say, when you’re wrong you’re wrong ;)

Ok, I hate using Protege and and a main force behind Swoop, so I’m biased. If we can get Swoop stable, I think both the functionality and the usability blow Protege out of the water. (For OWL, at least.)

]]> By: Matt Williams http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-45 Matt Williams Fri, 27 Jan 2006 21:57:12 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-45 Interesting article...I'd heard a bit about Sesame, but will go and have a look. Agree about Kowari, both that it's good, and a REAL PITA to get running (all the docs are out of date wrt packages, so even running the examples breaks....). Also agree about Pellet, which is great. AFAIK, FACT++ is only OWL-Lite, whereas Pellet is OWL-DL plus cardinality. Others (like RACER) lose out due to the closed source/ 'license your kidneys to use the software' approach. I'd choose Protege over SWOOP any day... Just my penny's worth, Matt Interesting article…I’d heard a bit about Sesame, but will go and have a look.

Agree about Kowari, both that it’s good, and a REAL PITA to get running (all the docs are out of date wrt packages, so even running the examples breaks….).

Also agree about Pellet, which is great. AFAIK, FACT++ is only OWL-Lite, whereas Pellet is OWL-DL plus cardinality. Others (like RACER) lose out due to the closed source/ ‘license your kidneys to use the software’ approach.

I’d choose Protege over SWOOP any day…

Just my penny’s worth,
Matt

]]> By: Matt Williams http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2005/12/28/5-best-semweb-tools/#comment-8514 Matt Williams Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:57:12 +0000 http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/?p=19#comment-8514 Interesting article...I'd heard a bit about Sesame, but will go and have a look.<br><br>Agree about Kowari, both that it's good, and a REAL PITA to get running (all the docs are out of date wrt packages, so even running the examples breaks....).<br><br>Also agree about Pellet, which is great. AFAIK, FACT++ is only OWL-Lite, whereas Pellet is OWL-DL plus cardinality. Others (like RACER) lose out due to the closed source/ 'license your kidneys to use the software' approach.<br><br>I'd choose Protege over SWOOP any day...<br><br>Just my penny's worth,<br>Matt Interesting article…I’d heard a bit about Sesame, but will go and have a look.

Agree about Kowari, both that it’s good, and a REAL PITA to get running (all the docs are out of date wrt packages, so even running the examples breaks….).

Also agree about Pellet, which is great. AFAIK, FACT++ is only OWL-Lite, whereas Pellet is OWL-DL plus cardinality. Others (like RACER) lose out due to the closed source/ ‘license your kidneys to use the software’ approach.

I’d choose Protege over SWOOP any day…

Just my penny’s worth,
Matt

]]>