Devi | 1 Mar 10:46 2007
Picon

import XML file into protege

Hi All,

i am using protege 3.2 beta, I am trying to import xml file into protege, initially go well with xml file fairish 360 Kb, but my moment try to import fairish xml file 35.6 Mb, I got error message of my computer 'out of memory', i have 512 Mb RAM on my computer, i try to edit protege.lax file on lax.nl.java.option.java.heap.size.max=800000000 row, but still doesn't work (hang), there are any solution to import huge size xml file into protege?

-dv

_______________________________________________
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 
Abrami Géraldine | 1 Mar 16:20 2007
Picon

Re: how to infer hierarchisation and relations ?

Thank you very much Thomas for your clear answer.

Just to check we have understood each other correctly, in our case, we make the assumption that every answer
A2 to a question Q2 is a consequence for an answer A1 of a question Q1. (Q1 and Q2 are classes. They represent
the first and second questions in a questionnaire, which is made such as all answers to Q1 are actions. They
get instances when we look at an actual interview made with this questionnaire). 
And you say that it is not possible to build in OWL some kind of link between Q1 and Q2 (classes) that can make us
infer that if a1 is answer of q1 and a2 is answer of q2, then a2 is a consequence of a1. 
But that this can be made with SWRL. Am I right? 

Would you know by the way of a pedagogic document explaining what it is possible to infer with OWL and how? 

Cheers

G.A.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : protege-owl-bounces <at> mailman.stanford.edu
[mailto:protege-owl-bounces <at> mailman.stanford.edu] De la part de Thomas Russ
Envoyé : 28 February 2007 20:45
À : User support for the Protege-OWL editor
Objet : Re: [protege-owl] how to infer hierarchisation and relations ?

On Feb 28, 2007, at 10:18 AM, Abrami Géraldine wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are facing the following issue, trying to use Protégé-OWL to  
> complete and fill a predefined ontology from questionaries data.
>
>
>
> We have defined the following elements
>
> Some classes Action, Consequence, Answer and Question
>
> -          Action hasConsequences some Consequence
>
> -          Answer isAnswerOf some Question  / Question has Answer  
> some Answer
>
> Then we have an ontological structure of our questionnaire :
>
> -          Q1 and Q2 are subclasses of Question
>
> -          We know that answers to Q1 are Action
This should be easy to express by restricting ALL hasAnswer to be  
Action.

You probably also want to make the property hasAnswer functional

> and answers to Q2 are consequences

Again easy.

> of Action answered in Q1

This is the part I don't think you can do.

It sounds here like you have switched from talking about classes to  
talking about particular instances.  I don't think that it is the  
case that every consequence (from all instances of Q2) is a  
consequence of every action (from all instances of Q1).

> (so we have  made Action a defined class with a restriction  
> isAnswerOf some Q1 - dunno if it is the right way to do it)
>
> And an ontological translation of our interviews, for instance :
>
> -          Q1 hasAnswer Action1
>
> -          Q2 hasAnswer Cons1

This looks like you want Q1 and Q2 to be instances.  What is missing  
is any sort of link between Q1 and Q2 in your description.  You would  
have to add the assertion

   Action1 hasConsequence Cons1

OWL doesn't support restrictions between fillers or role chains, so  
you can't express the idea that
       x.hasAnswer.hasConsequence = x.successorQuestion.hasConsequence
in the OWL language.
> We cannot find a simple way to build such a specification that a  
> reasonner can then infer that :
>
> -         Action1 is an Action
>
> -         Cons1 is a Consequence
These two are easy, assuming that your instances Q1 and Q2 are  
members of different subclasses of Question.

> -         Action1 hasConsequences some Cons1

This can't be done in OWL.
You could probably write SWRL rules to accomplish this, though.

_______________________________________________
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 

Jennifer Vendetti | 1 Mar 20:34 2007
Picon

Re: import XML file into protege

Devi,

What are you using to import the XML file?  The XML Tab?  Can you send us the XML file that you are having trouble with?

Jennifer

Devi wrote:
Hi All,

i am using protege 3.2 beta, I am trying to import xml file into protege, initially go well with xml file fairish 360 Kb, but my moment try to import fairish xml file 35.6 Mb, I got error message of my computer 'out of memory', i have 512 Mb RAM on my computer, i try to edit protege.lax file on lax.nl.java.option.java.heap.size.max=800000000 row, but still doesn't work (hang), there are any solution to import huge size xml file into protege?

-dv
_______________________________________________ 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 
Tania Tudorache | 1 Mar 21:13 2007
Picon

Re: import XML file into protege

Devi,

You cannot set the maximum heap size to something greater than your 
total amount of memory. You should set it at maximum 80% of your 
available memory. See 
http://protege.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ScalabilityAndTuning

Anyway, if the ontology that you import is very large (and it could be 
from a 35 Mb XML file), probably it won't fit into memory. So, what you 
could do, is to create an empty database project and then active the 
XMLTab and then do the import. In this way, the ontology is imported 
into the database and it doesn't have to be all in memory.

Tania

Devi wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> i am using protege 3.2 beta, I am trying to import xml file into 
> protege, initially go well with xml file fairish 360 Kb, but my moment 
> try to import fairish xml file 35.6 Mb, I got error message of my 
> computer 'out of memory', i have 512 Mb RAM on my computer, i try to 
> edit protege.lax file on 
> lax.nl.java.option.java.heap.size.max=800000000 row, but still doesn't 
> work (hang), there are any solution to import huge size xml file into 
> protege?
>
> -dv
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 

Martin O'Connor | 1 Mar 22:01 2007
Picon

Re: how to infer hierarchisation and relations ?


Put simply, cannot usually express property chaining inferences in OWL 
DL. For example, inferring an uncle relationship from parent and brother 
relationships would not be possible. In SWRL [1] this would look like:

hasParent(?x, ?y) ^ hasBrother(?y, ?z) -> hasUncle(?x, ?z)

Transitive properties (such as, for example, hasAncestor) are an obvious 
exception.

A formal discussion of the this topic can be found in [2].

Martin

[1] http://protege.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SWRLTab

[2] Boris Motik, Ulrike Sattler, and Rudi Studer. Query answering for OWLDL
with rules. In Sheila A. McIlraith, Dimitris Plexousakis, and Frank van
Harmelen, editors, The SemanticWeb ISWC 2004: Third International Semantic
Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan, November 7-11, 2004. Proceedings,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, page 549. Springer-Verlag GmbH, 2004.

>Thank you very much Thomas for your clear answer.
>
>Just to check we have understood each other correctly, in our case, we make the assumption that every
answer A2 to a question Q2 is a consequence for an answer A1 of a question Q1. (Q1 and Q2 are classes. They
represent the first and second questions in a questionnaire, which is made such as all answers to Q1 are
actions. They get instances when we look at an actual interview made with this questionnaire). 
>And you say that it is not possible to build in OWL some kind of link between Q1 and Q2 (classes) that can make
us infer that if a1 is answer of q1 and a2 is answer of q2, then a2 is a consequence of a1. 
>But that this can be made with SWRL. Am I right? 
>
>Would you know by the way of a pedagogic document explaining what it is possible to infer with OWL and how? 
>
>Cheers
>
>G.A.
>
>
>
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : protege-owl-bounces <at> mailman.stanford.edu
[mailto:protege-owl-bounces <at> mailman.stanford.edu] De la part de Thomas Russ
>Envoyé : 28 February 2007 20:45
>À : User support for the Protege-OWL editor
>Objet : Re: [protege-owl] how to infer hierarchisation and relations ?
>
>
>On Feb 28, 2007, at 10:18 AM, Abrami Géraldine wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>>We are facing the following issue, trying to use Protégé-OWL to  
>>complete and fill a predefined ontology from questionaries data.
>>
>>
>>
>>We have defined the following elements
>>
>>Some classes Action, Consequence, Answer and Question
>>
>>-          Action hasConsequences some Consequence
>>
>>-          Answer isAnswerOf some Question  / Question has Answer  
>>some Answer
>>
>>Then we have an ontological structure of our questionnaire :
>>
>>-          Q1 and Q2 are subclasses of Question
>>
>>-          We know that answers to Q1 are Action
>>    
>>
>This should be easy to express by restricting ALL hasAnswer to be  
>Action.
>
>You probably also want to make the property hasAnswer functional
>
>  
>
>>and answers to Q2 are consequences
>>    
>>
>
>Again easy.
>
>  
>
>>of Action answered in Q1
>>    
>>
>
>This is the part I don't think you can do.
>
>It sounds here like you have switched from talking about classes to  
>talking about particular instances.  I don't think that it is the  
>case that every consequence (from all instances of Q2) is a  
>consequence of every action (from all instances of Q1).
>
>  
>
>>(so we have  made Action a defined class with a restriction  
>>isAnswerOf some Q1 - dunno if it is the right way to do it)
>>
>>And an ontological translation of our interviews, for instance :
>>
>>-          Q1 hasAnswer Action1
>>
>>-          Q2 hasAnswer Cons1
>>    
>>
>
>This looks like you want Q1 and Q2 to be instances.  What is missing  
>is any sort of link between Q1 and Q2 in your description.  You would  
>have to add the assertion
>
>   Action1 hasConsequence Cons1
>
>OWL doesn't support restrictions between fillers or role chains, so  
>you can't express the idea that
>       x.hasAnswer.hasConsequence = x.successorQuestion.hasConsequence
>in the OWL language.
>  
>
>>We cannot find a simple way to build such a specification that a  
>>reasonner can then infer that :
>>
>>-         Action1 is an Action
>>
>>-         Cons1 is a Consequence
>>    
>>
>These two are easy, assuming that your instances Q1 and Q2 are  
>members of different subclasses of Question.
>
>  
>
>>-         Action1 hasConsequences some Cons1
>>    
>>
>
>This can't be done in OWL.
>You could probably write SWRL rules to accomplish this, though.
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 

Stefan Woods | 1 Mar 22:09 2007
Picon

SWRL Jess Tab doesn't see instances

Hello,

I've managed to install Jess, load 2 ontologies, create 2 instances and enter an example rule.
When activating Jess I see the classes of the 2 imported ontologies, I can also see the rule that Jess
"converted" but I can't see the 2 instances, so consequently Jess didn't infer anything...

I've tried with first importing the two ontologies, then creating example instances.
The I tried creating instances in each ontology and then importing them.
Neither of those two tactics workes however. Am I missing something ?

Regards,

Stefan
_______________________________________________
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 

Martin O'Connor | 1 Mar 22:54 2007
Picon

Re: SWRL Jess Tab doesn't see instances


The SWRL-Jess bridge does not transfer all OWL knowledge to Jess - it 
transfers only the knowledge it needs. If those individuals are not 
referred to in a SWRL rule (directly or indirectly) they may not be 
transferred to Jess. Do you have an example of a rule that does not work?

Martin

Stefan Woods wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I've managed to install Jess, load 2 ontologies, create 2 instances and enter an example rule.
>When activating Jess I see the classes of the 2 imported ontologies, I can also see the rule that Jess
"converted" but I can't see the 2 instances, so consequently Jess didn't infer anything...
>
>I've tried with first importing the two ontologies, then creating example instances.
>The I tried creating instances in each ontology and then importing them.
>Neither of those two tactics workes however. Am I missing something ?
>
>Regards,
>
>Stefan
>_______________________________________________
>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 

Martin O'Connor | 1 Mar 23:02 2007
Picon

Re: Bug description for property inheritance


I have fixed this subproperty bug in the SWRLTab. It  will be in the 
next  beta build (or can be downloaded from the Protege-OWL and 
SWRLJessTab Subversion repositories).

Martin

Britta Hummel wrote:

> ...in addition to my last report, two other subproperty-related bugs 
> (?), one of which occurs in SWRL:
>
> 1. If you have the following scenario:
>
> TBox:
> myProperty
>     |
>     -> mySubProperty
>
> ABox:
> MyInstance1 --> myProperty --> MyInstance2.
>
> And, later on, you want to specialize further and say:
>
> MyInstance1 --> mySubProperty --> MyInstance2.
>
> You again run into the problem that MyInstance2 will appear twice as a 
> filler of myProperty.
>
>
> 2.
> SWRL does not seem to work with subproperties at all: No rule that 
> contains a subproperty in the antecedent fires.
>
>   Britta
>
>
>
>
> Britta Hummel schrieb:
>
>> Hi to all,
>>
>> are the following 2 problems Protégé - Bugs?
>>
>> 1. Create a property myProperty and a sub property mySubProperty. 
>> Protege will then automatically classify fillers of  mySubProperty as 
>> being Fillers for their super property. Fine.
>>
>> 2. Now create an inverse of myProperty, myInverseProperty, and create 
>> instances that are in the domain for this role. Protégé again 
>> automatically classifies these instances as Fillers of myProperty. 
>> Fine again.
>>
>> Looks like this now (sorry about the strange notation):
>>
>> myInverseProperty
>>   <--
>>   -->
>> myProperty
>>     |
>>     -> mySubProperty
>>
>> ABox:
>> myInstance1 --> mySubProperty --> myInstance2
>>
>> Inference:
>> myInstance1 --> myProperty --> myInstance2
>>
>> Problems:
>>
>> 1.
>> This process does not check for duplicates. The same instance can 
>> appear twice in the myProperty filler window.
>>
>> 2.
>> 'myInstance1' is not automatically inferred as being a filler of 
>> 'myInverseProperty'.
>>  
>> I attached a small example ontology.
>>
>>   Britta
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>><?xml version="1.0"?>
>><rdf:RDF
>>    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>>    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
>>    xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>>    xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
>>    xmlns="http://www.owl-ontologies.com/Ontology1171600891.owl#""
>>  xml:base=""http://www.owl-ontologies.com/Ontology1171600891.owl">
>>  <owl:Ontology rdf:about=""/>
>>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="MyClass2"/>
>>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="MyClass1"/>
>>  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="mySubProperty">
>>    <rdfs:subPropertyOf>
>>      <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="myProperty"/>
>>    </rdfs:subPropertyOf>
>>  </owl:ObjectProperty>
>>  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="#myProperty">
>>    <owl:inverseOf>
>>      <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="myInverseProperty"/>
>>    </owl:inverseOf>
>>    <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#MyClass2"/>
>>    <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyClass1"/>
>>  </owl:ObjectProperty>
>>  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="#myInverseProperty">
>>    <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#MyClass1"/>
>>    <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyClass2"/>
>>    <owl:inverseOf rdf:resource="#myProperty"/>
>>  </owl:ObjectProperty>
>>  <MyClass1 rdf:ID="MyIndividualOfClass1">
>>    <myProperty>
>>      <MyClass2 rdf:ID="MyIndividualOfClass2">
>>        <myInverseProperty rdf:resource="#MyIndividualOfClass1"/>
>>      </MyClass2>
>>    </myProperty>
>>    <mySubProperty rdf:resource="#MyIndividualOfClass2"/>
>>  </MyClass1>
>></rdf:RDF>
>>
>><!-- Created with Protege (with OWL Plugin 3.3, Build 371)  http://protege.stanford.edu -->
>>  
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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 

Stefan Woods | 2 Mar 09:58 2007
Picon

Re: SWRL Jess Tab doesn't see instances

Yes:

ont1 has a class Advertisement
ont2 also has a class Advertisement.

I simply want to create a rule that maps all instances/members of ont1:Advertisement to the other one (ont2:Advertisement).

so the rule becomes:

ont1:Advertisement(?x) --> ont2:Advertisement(?x)

Seems simple enough I think ?..

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Stefan

>The SWRL-Jess bridge does not transfer all OWL knowledge to Jess - it 
>transfers only the knowledge it needs. If those individuals are not 
>referred to in a SWRL rule (directly or indirectly) they may not be 
>transferred to Jess. Do you have an example of a rule that does not work?
>
>Martin
>
>Stefan Woods wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I've managed to install Jess, load 2 ontologies, create 2 instances and enter an example rule.
>>When activating Jess I see the classes of the 2 imported ontologies, I can also see the rule that Jess
"converted" but I can't see the 2 instances, so consequently Jess didn't infer anything...
>>
>>I've tried with first importing the two ontologies, then creating example instances.
>>The I tried creating instances in each ontology and then importing them.
>>Neither of those two tactics workes however. Am I missing something ?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Stefan
>>_______________________________________________
>>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 
>
>

Stefan Woods
2e Licentie Toegepaste Informatica - avond/werkstudent

_______________________________________________
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 

Christine Golbreich | 2 Mar 14:57 2007
Picon
Picon

Deadline Extension - OWLED 2007

*******************************************************
                 DEADLINE EXTENSION TO 11 MARCH, 2007
*******************************************************


==================================================
CALL FOR PAPERS

OWLED 2007
OWL: Experiences and Directions
http://owled2007.iut-velizy.uvsq.fr/

Third International Workshop
Innsbruck, Austria
6-7 June 2007

Submissions due **11 March, 2007 NEW DEADLINE**
Online submission at http://www.easychair.org/OWLED2007/

==================================================


The W3C OWL Web Ontology Language has been a W3C recommendation since 2004.
The OWL: Experiences and Direction (OWLED) workshop series is a forum for
practitioners in industry and academia, tool developers, and others
interested in OWL to describe real and potential applications, to share
experience, and to discuss requirements for language
extensions/modifications. At OWLED 2006 it was agreed to move forward with a
member submission of the OWL 1.1 proposal which extends OWL DL in ways that
have been requested by users, that have effective reasoning algorithms, and
that developers of OWL reasoning systems are willing to support.
The 3rd OWL: Experiences and Directions workshop (OWLED 2007) will again
bring users, implementors and researchers together in order to measure the
current state of need against the state of the art and to set an agenda for
language evolutions that satisfy users. OWLED 2007 shall in particular
present industrial efforts and experiences with OWL. It shall further the
interaction between industry, theoreticians and tool builders, help
consolidate OWL 1.1, clarify the relationships between OWL and rules and
initiate the specification of OWL 2.0.
Building on the success of the 2005 OWLED and the 2006 OWLED workshops, the
2007 OWLED workshop will again be immediately after one of the main Semantic
Web conferences, namely the ESWC conference, and is colocated with the First
International Conference on Web Reasoning and Rule Systems, RR2007.

Topics
-------------
OWLED 2007 welcomes the submission of papers about all aspects of OWL and
extensions, application, theory, method, tool, including but not limited to
the following topics:
- All applications of OWL
- Application-driven requirements for OWL
- Implementation techniques for OWL and related languages
- Performance and scalability issues
- Bridges between knowledge engineering and OWL
- Non-standard inference services, including explanations, static
verification, modularity
- Enriching ontologies with rules
- Query answering and data integration
- Tools for OWL including: editors, visualisation tools, parsers and syntax
checkers, versioning frameworks
- Extensions to OWL including: extended datatype constructors, property
constructors, class constructors keys, constraints, rules probabilistic and
fuzzy extensions, non-monotonic extensions, temporal and spatial extensions

***********************************************************
Submissions of papers on industrial efforts, experiences reports, system
descriptions, position papers (especially about new features or issues with
OWL), and survey papers about theory or tools (for example comparing
different ways of combining rules with OWL) are strongly encouraged. We
particularly welcome:
- Descriptions of industry system or industrial applications
- Experience reports with OWL or OWL 1.1 (or any fragment or extension)
Domain or application ontologies (e-Science, e-Health, e-Culture, e-Learning
etc.)
- Industry requirements
- Life Sciences or other community requirements
- Implementation issues with OWL or OWL 1.1
- Demos with OWL or OWL 1.1
- Reasoning with OWL and rules in practical applications
- Requirements for a potential OWL 2.0 revision
***********************************************************

Workshop Format
------------------------------
The goal of the workshop will be to maximise discussion. The technical
sessions will therefore consist of short presentations of selected papers
(grouped by topic area) followed by directed discussion. As in prior years,
there will be session(s) devoted to standardization efforts, to some issues
deferred from 2006 (alternative syntaxes, constraints, SPARQL and OWL, rules
and OWL), and a report, with discussion, on the progress of the OWL 1.1 W3C
submission and working group.


Submissions
----------------
Submissions can be either long or short papers. Papers must be no longer
than 10 pages. Short submissions no longer than 4 pages are welcome.
Interested parties may send the organizers a one page description of their
demo.
All submissions must be received before 11 March 2007. All papers must be
submitted online using the submission website
http://www.easychair.org/OWLED2007/
Submissions must be in PDF, and will not be accepted in any other format. It
is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that their submission
displays and prints correctly on common PDF viewers. Submissions must be
formatted in the style of the Springer Publications format for Lecture Notes
in Computer Science (LNCS). For details see
http://www.springeronline.com/sgw/cda/frontpage/0,11855,5-164-2-72376-0,00.h
tml.

Proceedings
-------------
All accepted submissions and demo descriptions will be made available from
the workshop web site; these may be updated with final versions after the
reviewing process. Final versions of accepted papers will be published on
CEUR-WS. Presentation materials from the workshop will also be placed on the
web site. All submissions will be reviewed by the workshop committee.
Decisions on the acceptance of papers will be communicated to authors no
later than 14 April, 2007.

Organization
-------------------
General Chair: Bijan Parsia, University of Manchester (UK)

Programme Chairs
----------------------------
Christine Golbreich, University of Versailles (France)
Aditya Kalyanpur, IBM TJ Watson (USA)

Steering Committee
-----------------------------
Bernardo Cuenca Grau, University of Manchester (UK)
Pascal Hitzler, AIFB Karlsruhe (Germany)
Ian Horrocks, University of Manchester (UK)
Bijan Parsia, University of Manchester (UK)
Peter Patel-Schneider, Bell Labs (USA)

Program Committee
--------------------------------------------------------

Dean Allemang, TopQuadrant (USA)
Diego Calvanese, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (Italy)
Kendall Clark, Clark&Parsia LLC (USA)
Catherine Dolbear, Ordinance Survey of Great Britain (UK)
Peter Fox, High Altitude Observatory (USA)
Volker Haarslev, Concordia University (Canada)
Peter Haase, AIFB (Germany)
Rinke Hoekstra, University of Amsterdam(NL)
Vipul Kashyap, Partners HealthCare System (USA)
Alain Léger, France Telecom (France)
François-Marie Lesaffre, Arcelor (France)
Thorsten Liebig, Ulm University, (Germany)
Yann Loyer, University of Versailles (France)
Joanne Luciano, Harvard Medical School (USA)
Carsten Lutz, TU Dresden (Germany)
Pierre Mariot, Ardans (France)
Maryann Martone, BIRN (USA)
Deborah McGuinness, Stanford University (USA)
Anne Monceaux, EADS CCR (France)
Boris Motik, University of Manchester (UK)
Chris Mungall, Gene Ontology and Lawrence Berkeley Labs (USA)
Gary Ng, Web Methods (USA)
Daniel Oberle, SAP AG (Germany)
Massimo Paolucci, NTT DoCoMo (Germany)
Jeff Z. Pan, University of Aberdeen (UK)
Riccardo Rosati, Universita di Roma La Sapienza (Italy)
Daniel Rubin, CBIO (USA)
Alan Ruttenberg, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, (USA)
Ulrike Sattler, University of Manchester (UK)
Guus Schreiber, Vrije Universitat Amsterdam (NL)
François-Paul Servant, Renault (France)
Margherita Sini, FAO (Italy)
Kent Spackman, SNOMED (USA)
Robert Stevens, BioHealth Informatics Group University of Manchester (UK)
Susie Stephens, Oracle (USA)
Umberto Straccia, ISTI-CNR Pisa (Italy)
Hans Teijgeler, ISO Standards (NL)
_______________________________________________
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 

Gmane