Semantic Web-Based Information Systems: State-of-the-Art ...
Semantic Web-Based Information Systems: State-of-the-Art ...
Semantic Web-Based Information Systems: State-of-the-Art ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Corcho & Gómez-Pérez<br />
Motta, E. (1999). Reusable components for knowledge modelling: Principles and<br />
case studies in parametric design. Amsterdam, The Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands: IOS Press.<br />
Noy, N. F., Fergerson, R. W., & Musen, M. A. (2000). The knowledge model <strong>of</strong><br />
Protege-2000: Combining interoperability and flexibility. In Proceedings <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> 12 th International Conference in Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge<br />
Management (EKAW’00), Juan-Les-Pins, France.<br />
Schreiber, G., et al. (1999). Knowledge engineering and management. The commonKADS<br />
methodology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.<br />
Studer, R., Benjamins, V. R., & Fensel, D. (1998). Knowledge engineering: Principles<br />
and methods. IEEE Transactions on Data and Knowledge Engineering,<br />
25(1-2), 161-197.<br />
Sure, Y., Staab, S., & Angele, J. (2002). OntoEdit: Guiding ontology development by<br />
methodology and inferencing. In Proceedings <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Confederated International<br />
Conferences CoopIS, DOA and ODBASE 2002, Berlin, Germany.<br />
Swartout, B., Ramesh, P., Knight, K., & Russ, T. (1997). Toward distributed use <strong>of</strong><br />
large-scale ontologies. In Proceedings <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Spring Symposium on Ontological<br />
Engineering, Stanford, CA.<br />
Endnotes<br />
* The current affiliation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> author is Intelligent S<strong>of</strong>tware Components, Spain.<br />
The work presented was performed at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.<br />
1 The problems that may appear in <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong> semantic interoperability are<br />
due not only to <strong>the</strong> fact that ontologies are available in different formats, but<br />
<strong>the</strong>y are also related to <strong>the</strong> content <strong>of</strong> ontologies, <strong>the</strong>ir ontological commitments,<br />
and so forth. We only focus on <strong>the</strong> problems related exclusively to <strong>the</strong><br />
differences between ontology languages and/or tools.<br />
2 These types <strong>of</strong> problems also may be related to <strong>the</strong> pragmatic layer, as we will<br />
describe later in this section. We also will see that <strong>the</strong> limits <strong>of</strong> each translation<br />
layer are not strict; hence, we can find transformation problems that are in <strong>the</strong><br />
middle <strong>of</strong> several layers.<br />
3 As with naming conventions, this decision also will be related to <strong>the</strong> pragmatic<br />
translation layer.<br />
4 Protégé Axiom Language<br />
5 We must note that this second option may be obtained because expressions in<br />
OWL ontologies may appear in any order in an OWL file and, hence, may be<br />
processed independently.<br />
Copyright © 2007, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission <strong>of</strong><br />
Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.