$ A. Ontology%&'( Ontology A.1Kq (target.owl)
|
|
|
- Moses White
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 $ A Ontology%&'( Ontology A.1Kq (target.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:environment=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:resouce=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:policy=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>target ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="targetuser"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource=" <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#user"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="targetresource"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#target"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="targetaction"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#target"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="targetenvironment"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#target"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" 49
2 Ontology A.2Kq (target.owl) 2 <owl:class rdf:id="target"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="targetuser"/> rdf:datatype=" 1</owl:minCardinality> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="targetresource"/> rdf:datatype=" 1</owl:minCardinality> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="targetaction"/> rdf:datatype=" 1</owl:minCardinality> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="targetenvironment"/> 50
3 Ontology A.3kC (user.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:environment=" xmlns:resoucre=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:policy=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:target=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>user ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="user"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasname"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasnai"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hassimcard"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#engagedin"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#locatedin"/> <owl:allvaluefrom rdf:resource=" rdf:datatype=" 1</owl:minCardinality> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#own"/> <owl:class rdf:id="device"/> <!-- subclass of user: staff, partner, manager--> <owl:class rdf:id="staff"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#user"/> <owl:class rdf:id="partner"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#user"/> <owl:class rdf:id="manager"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#user"/> 51
4 Ontology A.4kC (user.owl) 2 <!--object property --> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="own"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#user"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#device"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="engagedin"> <!-- engaged in some action--> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#user"/> <rdfs:range> <owl:class> <owl:unionof rdf:parsetype="collection"> <owl:class rdf:about=" <owl:class rdf:about=" <owl:class rdf:about=" <owl:class rdf:about=" </owl:unionof> </rdfs:range> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="locatedin"> <rdfs:domain> <owl:class> <owl:unionof rdf:parsetype="collection"> <owl:class rdf:about="#user"/> <owl:class rdf:about=" </owl:unionof> </rdfs:domain> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasname"> <rdfs:domain> <owl:class> <owl:uniofof rdfs:parsetype="collection"> <owl:class rdfs:resource="#user"/> <owl:class rdf:resource=" </owl:uniofof> </rdfs:domain> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasnai"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resorce="#user"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hassimcard"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#user"/> 52
5 Ontology A.59 (objectinfo.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:environment=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:target=" xmlns:policy=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>resource and action ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="objectinfo"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resourc=" /> <owl:allvaluefrom rdf:resource=" rdf:datatype=" <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasstatus"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resorce="#objectinfo"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasurl"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resorce="#objectinfo"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasservicetype"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resorce="#objectinfo"/> 53
6 Ontology A.6#$ (action.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:environment=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:resouce=" xmlns:target=" xmlns:policy=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>action ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="action"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#operateon"/> rdf:datatype=" <owl:class rdf:id="use"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#action"/> <owl:class rdf:id="copy"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#action"/> <owl:class rdf:id="read"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#action"/> <owl:class rdf:id="moodify"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#action"/> <owl:class rdf:id="download"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#action"/> <owl:objectproperty rdf:id="operateon"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#action"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" </owl:objectproperty> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasaccesstime"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#action"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" 54
7 Ontology A.7#$ (environment.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:resoucre=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:target=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:policy=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>environment</rdfs:comment> </owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="enviornment"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#requestfrom"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#virtualaddress"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#utilize"/> <owl:class rdf:id="userenvironment"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="environment"/> <owl:class rdf:id="resourceenvironment"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="environment"/> <owl:class rdf:id="accesspoint"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasnasip"/> 55
8 Ontology A.8#$ (environment.owl) 2 <owl:class rdf:id="virtuallocation"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasip"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasproxy"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasdomain"/> <owl:class rdf:id="networkmedia"/> <owl:class rdf:id="lan"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#netwokmedia"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#wlan"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resouce="#vpn"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#3g"/> <owl:class rdf:id="wlan"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#netwokmedia"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#lan"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resouce="#vpn"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#3g"/> <owl:class rdf:id="vpn"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#netwokmedia"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#lan"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resouce="#wlan"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#3g"/> <owl:class rdf:id="3g"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#netwokmedia"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#wlan"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resouce="#vpn"/> <owl:disjointwith rdf:resource="#lan"/> 56
9 Ontology A.9#$ (environment.owl) 2 <owl:objectproperty rdf:id="requestfrom"> <rdf:domain rdf:resource="#environment"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource="#accesspoint"/> </owl:objectproperty> <owl:objectproperty rdf:id="virtualaddress"> <rdf:domain rdf:resource="#environment"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource="#virtuallocation"/> </owl:objectproperty> <owl:objectproperty rdf:id="utilize"> <rdf:domain rdf:resource="#environment"/> <rdf:range> <owl:class> <owl:unionof rdf:parsetype="collection"> <owl:class rdf:about="#lan"/> <owl:class rdf:about="#wlan"/> <owl:class rdf:about="#vpn"/> <owl:class rdf:about="#3g"/> </owl:unionof> </rdf:range> </owl:objectproperty> <owl:objectproperty rdf:id="determine"> <rdf:domain rdf:resource="#netwokrmedia"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource=" </owl:objectproperty> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasnasip"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#accesspoint"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasip"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#virtuallocation"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasproxy"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#virtuallocation"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasdonain"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#virtuallocation"/> 57
10 Ontology A.10rsy (result.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:environment=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:resouce=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:target=" xmlns:policy=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>effect and configuration ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="effect"/> <owl:class rdf:id="grant"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#effect"/> <owl:class rdf:id="deny"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="#effect"/> <owl:class rdf:id="configuration"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#timelimit"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#encryptionlimit"/> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#iplimit"/> <owl:class rdf:id="timeconstraint"/> <owl:class rdf:id="encryptionconstraint"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#set"/> <owl:maxcardinality rdf:datatype=" <owl:class rdf:id="ipfilterconstraint"/> <owl:class rdf:id="free"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryptionconstraint"/> <owl:class rdf:id="basic"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryptionconstraint"/> <owl:class rdf:id="middle"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryptionconstraint"/> <owl:class rdf:id="high"> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryptionconstraint"/> 58
11 Ontology A.11rsy (result.owl) 2 <owl:class rdf:id="des"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryption"/> <owl:class rdf:id="mmpe"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryption"/> <owl:class rdf:id="3des"><rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="encryption"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="timelimit"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#configuraiton"/><rdfs:range rdf:resource="#timeconstraint"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="encryptionlimit"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#configuraiton"/><rdfs:range rdf:resource="#encryptionconstraint"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="iplimit"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#configuraiton"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#ipfilterconstraint"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="set"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#encryptionconstraint"/> <rdfs:range> <owl:class> <owl:unionof rdf:parsetype="collection"> <owl:class rdf:about="#des"/> <owl:class rdf:about="#mmpe"/> <owl:class rdf:about="#3des"/> </owl:unionof> </rdfs:range> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasstarttime"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#timeconstraint"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasendtime"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#timeconstraint"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasidletime"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#timeconstraint"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="hasconnectiontime"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#timeconstraint"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="inputip"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#ipfilterconstraint"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="outputip"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#ipfilterconstraint"/> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:id="evaluationresult"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#effect"/> 59
12 Ontology A.12 (policy.owl) xmlns=" xmlns:user=" xmlns:resoucre=" xmlns:action=" xmlns:result=" xmlns:target=" xmlns:environment=" <owl:ontology><rdfs:comment>policy ontology</rdfs:comment></owl:ontology> <owl:class rdf:id="acpolicy"> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#oncondition"/> rdf:datatype=" 1</owl:minCardinality> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#hasresult"/> rdf:datatype=" <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#haslimit"/> <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="oncondition"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#policy"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="hasresult"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#policy"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" <owl:obectproperty rdf:id="haslimit"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#policy"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource=" 60
Appendix B: The LCA ontology (lca.owl) DEVELOPING AN OWL ONTOLOGY FOR E- TOURISM
Chapter 4 DEVELOPING AN OWL ONTOLOGY FOR E- TOURISM Jorge Cardoso Department of Mathematics and Engineering, University of Madeira, 9000-390, Funchal, Portugal jcardoso@uma.pt 1. INTRODUCTION Currently,
Semantic Technologies
Semantic Technologies Part 14: Werner Nutt Acknowledgment These slides are based on the Latex version of slides by Markus Krötzsch of TU Dresden W. Nutt Semantic Technologies 2014/2015 (1/66) OWL W. Nutt
Web Ontology Language: OWL
Web Ontology Language: OWL Bojan Furlan A Semantic Web Primer, G. Antoniou, F. van Harmelen Requirements for Ontology Languages Ontology languages allow users to write explicit, formal conceptualizations
12th ICCRTS. On the Automated Generation of an OWL Ontology based on the Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM)
12th ICCRTS On the Automated Generation of an OWL Ontology based on the Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM) Christopher J. Matheus and Brian Ulicny VIStology, Inc. Framingham, MA, U.S.A.
FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES
FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES OWL Syntax & Intuition Sebastian Rudolph Dresden, 26 April 2013 Content Overview & XML 9 APR DS2 Hypertableau II 7 JUN DS5 Introduction into RDF 9 APR DS3 Tutorial
Short notes about OWL 1
University of Rome Tor Vergata Short notes about OWL 1 Manuel Fiorelli fiorelli@info.uniroma2.it [1] this presentation is limited to OWL 1 features. A new version of OWL (OWL 2), which adds further features
KDI OWL. Fausto Giunchiglia and Mattia Fumagallli. University of Trento
KDI OWL Fausto Giunchiglia and Mattia Fumagallli University of Trento Roadmap Introduction The OWL Full Language OWL DL and OWL lite Exercises 2 Introduction Chapter 1 3 Requirements for Ontology Languages
Intelligent Agents. Pınar Yolum Utrecht University. Spring 2018 Pınar Yolum
Intelligent Agents Pınar Yolum p.yolum@uu.nl Utrecht University Spring 2018 Pınar Yolum Web Ontology Language Spring 2018 Pınar Yolum Based largely on Dean Allemang; James Hendler, Semantic Web for the
Web Ontology Language: OWL by Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen
Web Ontology Language: OWL by Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen Reference: `A Semantic Web Primer, by Grigoris Antoniou and Frank van Harmelen, The MIT Press, 2004 Lecture Outline 1. Basic Ideas of
Web Ontology Language: OWL
Web Ontology Language: OWL Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen 1 Lecture Outline 1. Basic Ideas of OWL 2. The OWL Language 3. Examples 4. The OWL Namespace 5. Future Extensions 2 Requirements for Ontology
Semantic Web. Ontology and OWL. Morteza Amini. Sharif University of Technology Fall 95-96
ه عا ی Semantic Web Ontology and OWL Morteza Amini Sharif University of Technology Fall 95-96 Outline Introduction & Definitions Ontology Languages OWL (Ontology Web Language) 2 Outline Introduction &
The Semantic Web RDF, RDF Schema, and OWL (Part 2)
The Semantic Web RDF, RDF Schema, and OWL (Part 2) Mitchell W. Smith Array BioPharma, Inc. msmith@arraybiopharma.com Page Agenda Part One: RDF RDF/XML Syntax RDF Schema SPARQL Part Two: OWL Ontologies
9 The Ontology UML Profile
9 The Ontology UML Profile UML profile is a concept used for adapting the basic UML constructs to a specific purpose. Essentially, this means introducing new kinds of modeling elements by extending the
Web Ontology Language: OWL
Web Ontology Language: OWL 1 Requirements for Ontology Languages Ontology languages allow users to write explicit, formal conceptualizations of domain models The main requirements are: a well-defined syntax
OWL Web Ontology Language
Mustafa Jarrar Lecture Notes, Knowledge Engineering (SCOM7348) University of Birzeit 1 st Semester, 2011 Knowledge Engineering (SCOM7348) OWL Web Ontology Language Dr. Mustafa Jarrar University of Birzeit
Chapter 4 Web Ontology Language: OWL
Web Ontology Language: OWL Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen 1 Lecture Outline 1. Basic Ideas of OWL 2. The OWL Language 3. Examples 4. The OWL Namespace 5. Future Extensions 2 Requirements for Ontology
Knowledge management. OWL Web Ontology Language
Knowledge management. OWL Web Ontology Language 1 RDF/RDFS RDF: triples for making assertions about resources RDFS extends RDF with schema vocabulary, e.g.: Class, Property type, subclassof, subpropertyof
Knowledge management. OWL Web Ontology Language
RDF/RDFS Knowledge management. OWL Web Ontology Language RDF: triples for making assertions about resources RDFS extends RDF with schema vocabulary, e.g.: Class, Property type, subclassof, subpropertyof
An RDF-based Distributed Expert System
An RDF-based Distributed Expert System NAPAT PRAPAKORN*, SUPHAMIT CHITTAYASOTHORN** Department of Computer Engineering King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang Faculty of Engineering, Bangkok
08 OWL SEMANTIC WEB ONTOLOGY WEB LANGUAGE IMRAN IHSAN ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, AIR UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD
SEMANTIC WEB 08 OWL ONTOLOGY WEB LANGUAGE IMRAN IHSAN ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, AIR UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD WWW.IMRANIHSAN.COM BASED ON SLIDES FROM GRIGORIS ANTONIOU AND FRANK VAN HARMELEN THE OWL FAMILY TREE
Introduction to OWL. Marco Ronchetti Università di Trento Italy
Introduction to OWL Marco Ronchetti Università di Trento Italy Languages Work on Semantic Web has concentrated on the definition of a collection or stack of languages.! These languages are then used to
TMCL and OWL. Lars Marius Garshol. Bouvet, Oslo, Norway
TMCL and OWL Lars Marius Garshol Bouvet, Oslo, Norway larsga@bouvet.no Abstract. This paper compares the Topic Maps schema language TMCL with the corresponding RDF technologies RDFS/OWL, and describes
Chapter 4 OWL. Outline. A Brief History of OWL: SHOE. The OWL Family Tree
Chapter 4 OWL Outline 1. A bit of history 2. Basic Ideas of OWL 3. The OWL Language 4. Examples 5. The OWL Namespace 6. Future Extensions Based on slides from Grigoris Antoniou and Frank van Harmelen The
Table of Contents. iii
Current Web 1 1.1 Current Web History 1 1.2 Current Web Characteristics 2 1.2.1 Current Web Features 2 1.2.2 Current Web Benefits 3 1.2.3. Current Web Applications 3 1.3 Why the Current Web is not Enough
Advanced Set of Rules to Generate Ontology from Relational Database
Advanced Set of Rules to Generate Ontology from Relational Database Abdeljalil Boumlik*, Mohamed Bahaj Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University Hassan 1, Faculty of Sciences and Technology,
Interoperability of XML Schema Applications with OWL Domain Knowledge and Semantic Web Tools
Interoperability of XML Schema Applications with OWL Domain Knowledge and Semantic Web Tools Chrisa Tsinaraki 1 and Stavros Christodoulakis 1 1 TUC/MUSIC, Technical University of Crete Campus, 73100 Kounoupidiana,
Semantic Web in Depth: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Dr Nicholas Gibbins 32/3019
Semantic Web in Depth: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Dr Nicholas Gibbins 32/3019 nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk Introducing OWL For many, RDF Schema is a sufficiently expressive ontology language However, there are
Chapter 3 Research Method
Chapter 3 Research Method 3.1 A Ontology-Based Method As we mention in section 2.3.6, we need a common approach to build up our ontologies for different B2B standards. In this chapter, we present a ontology-based
Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Development
Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Development Foreword by Bran Selic 1. Auflage 2006. Buch. XVIII, 312 S. Hardcover ISBN 978 3 540 32180 4 Format (B x L): 15,5 x 23,5 cm Zu Inhaltsverzeichnis schnell
The ISO D approach
The ISO 15926 4D approach David Leal, 2016-11-14 With examples of the use of OWL DL inferencing Contents 1. Use of 4D Approach to a stream, as in engineering analysis Instantiation to support inferencing
University of Dublin Trinity College. RDF Schema and OWL
University of Dublin Trinity College RDF Schema and OWL RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema Web Ontology Language Adapted from course notes of Rob Brennan, TCD, Declan O Sullivan, TCD and
Chapter 4 OWL. Outline. The OWL Family Tree. A Brief History of OWL: SHOE
Chapter 4 OWL Outline 1. A bit of history 2. Basic Ideas of OWL 3. The OWL Language 4. Examples 5. The OWL Namespace 6. OWL 2 Based on slides from Grigoris Antoniou and Frank van Harmelen The OWL Family
USDL: A Service-Semantics Description Language for Automatic Service Discovery and Composition.
USDL: A Service-Semantics Description Language for Automatic Service Discovery and Composition. Srividya Kona, Ajay Bansal, Luke Simon, Ajay Mallya, and Gopal Gupta University of Texas at Dallas Richardson,
Chapter 2 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OWL WEB ONTOLOGY LANGUAGE 1. INTRODUCTION. Jeff Heflin Lehigh University
Chapter 2 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OWL WEB ONTOLOGY LANGUAGE Jeff Heflin Lehigh University Abstract: Key words: 1. INTRODUCTION The OWL Web Ontology Language is an international standard for encoding and
A Core Grid Ontology for the Semantic Grid
A Core Grid Ontology for the Semantic Grid Wei Xing Marios D. Dikaiakos Department of Computer Science University of Cyprus CY-1678 Nicosia, Cyprus {xing, mdd}@cs.ucy.ac.cy Rizos Sakellariou School of
Genea: Schema-Aware Mapping of Ontologies into Relational Databases
Genea: Schema-Aware Mapping of Ontologies into Relational Databases Tim Kraska Uwe Röhm University of Sydney School of Information Technologies Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia mail@tim-kraska.de roehm@it.usyd.edu.au
LINKING BACKGROUND INFORMATION
LINKING BACKGROUND INFORMATION INTERLINK D4 Appendix 4, Michel Böhms (TNO) With input from EU V-CON and bsi LDWG OVERVIEW Basic Linking More Background Info on L1/L2/L3 semantic levels Advanced Linking
Deep integration of Python with Semantic Web technologies
Deep integration of Python with Semantic Web technologies Marian Babik, Ladislav Hluchy Intelligent and Knowledge Technologies Group Institute of Informatics, SAS Goals of the presentation Brief introduction
Semantic Web Technologies: Web Ontology Language
Semantic Web Technologies: Web Ontology Language Motivation OWL Formal Semantic OWL Synopsis OWL Programming Introduction XML / XML Schema provides a portable framework for defining a syntax RDF forms
3/6/08. Introduction to Ontology Web Language (OWL) Graphs. Representing knowledge. Graphs as knowledge 2. Graphs as knowledge 1
University of Dublin Trinity College Stack Architecture for Semantic Web Introduction to Ontology Web Language (OWL) Dr. Owen Conlan Intro to OWL Declan O Sullivan 2 Representing knowledge There are a
Qallme Semantic Web Data Access
http://qallme.itc.it Qallme Semantic Web Data Access Author: Affiliation: Qall- Me Consortium FBK, University of Wolverhampton,, University of Alicante, DFKI,, Comdata, Ubiest, Waycom Keywords: ontology,
Teil IV: Wissensrepräsentation im WWW. Kap.11: Semantic Web. The semantic web layer cake
The semantic web layer cake Vorlesung Künstliche Intelligenz Wintersemester 2007/08 Teil IV: Wissensrepräsentation im WWW Kap.11: Semantic Web Dieses Kapitel basiert weitgehend auf Material von Pascal
A Frame-based Resource Description Framework Expert System
A Frame-based Resource Description Framework Expert System NAPAT PRAPAKORN*, SUPHAMIT CHITTAYASOTHORN** Department of Computer Engineering King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang Faculty of Engineering,
Introduction to the Semantic Web. Alberto Fernández University Rey Juan Carlos
Introduction to the Semantic Web Alberto Fernández University Rey Juan Carlos alberto.fernandez@urjc.es 1 2 1 University Rey Juan Carlos Alcorcón Medicine & Health Sciences Vicálvaro Law & Social Sciences
Teil IV: Wissensrepräsentation im WWW. Kap.11: Semantic Web
Vorlesung Künstliche Intelligenz Wintersemester 2007/08 Teil IV: Wissensrepräsentation im WWW Kap.11: Semantic Web Dieses Kapitel basiert weitgehend auf Material von Pascal Hitzler. Weitere Infos gibt
Lecture 8 OWL: Web Ontology Language
info-h-509 xml technologies Lecture 8 OWL: Web Ontology Language Stijn Vansummeren February 14, 2017 lecture outline 1 Our story so far 2 Web Ontology Language OWL 3 Reasoning with OWL 1 Part I: Our story
Modeling LMF compliant lexica in OWL-DL
19 21 June 11th International conference DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. Modeling LMF compliant lexica in OWL-DL Malek Lhioui 1, Kais Haddar 1 and Laurent Romary 2 1 : Multimedia, InfoRmation
Extracting Ontologies from Standards: Experiences and Issues
Extracting Ontologies from Standards: Experiences and Issues Ken Baclawski, Yuwang Yin, Sumit Purohit College of Computer and Information Science Northeastern University Eric S. Chan Oracle Abstract We
7.2 OWL. the OWL versions use certain DL semantics:
7.2 OWL the OWL versions use certain DL semantics: Base: ALC R +: (i.e., with transitive roles). This logic is called S (reminiscent to its similarity to the modal logic S). roles can be ordered hierarchically
A Framework for OWL DL based Ontology Construction from Relational Database using Mapping and Semantic Rules
A Framework for OWL DL based Construction from Relational Database using Mapping and Semantic Rules C.Ramathilagam Assistant Professor Adithya Institute of Technology Coimbatore, TamilNadu, India M.L.Valarmathi,
The Semantic Web. INF5100 Autumn 2007 Norun C. Sanderson
The Semantic Web INF5100 Autumn 2007 Norun C. Sanderson Outline TheSemanticWeb visionand purpose Technology building blocks Application areas Future INF5100 Autumn 2007 2 What is the Semantic Web? The
OWL Full and UML 2.0 Compared
OWL Full and UML 2.0 Compared This document is intended to establish the relationship between the relevant features of UML 2.0 and OWL as part of the development of the Ontology Definition Metamodel (ODM).
VSSo: the Vehicle Signal and Attribute Ontology. Benjamin Klotz, Raphaël Troncy, Daniel Wilms and Christian Bonnet
VSSo: the Vehicle Signal and Attribute Ontology Benjamin Klotz, Raphaël Troncy, Daniel Wilms and Christian Bonnet klotz@eurecom.fr Context {"name":"accelerator_pedal_position","value":0,"timestamp":1361454211.483000}
Defining Several Ontologies to Enhance the Expressive Power of Queries
Defining everal Ontologies to Enhance the Expressive Power of Queries Bich-Liên Doan and Yolaine Bourda Computer cience Dpt. UPELEC, 3 rue Joliot Curie, 91192 Gif-sur-Yvette, France Bich-Lien.Doan@supelec.fr,
Schemas (documentation for 6.1)
SWAD-Europe: WP6.3b Pragmatic Methods for Mapping Semantics from XML Schemas (documentation for 6.1) Project name: Semantic Web Advanced Development for Europe (SWAD-Europe) Project Number: IST-2001-34732
Blending FHIR RDF and OWL
Blending FHIR RDF and OWL Harold R. Solbrig, MS 1, Eric Prud hommeaux 2, Guoqian Jiang, MD, PhD 1 1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 2 W3C/MIT, Boston, MA Abstract HL7
Ontology Based Business Process Description
Ontology Based Business Process Description Agnes Koschmider and Andreas Oberweis Institute of Applied Informatics and Formal Description Methods, Universität Karlsruhe, 7687 Karlsruhe, Germany {koschmider,oberweis}@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de
Integration of the Semantic Web with Meta Object Facilities
Integration of the Semantic Web with Meta Object Facilities Work in progress supported by the U.S. General Service Administration s Open Source egov Reference Architecture (OsEra) Project Cory Casanave,
FHIR RDF Sample side by side comparisons
1 2 FHIR RDF Sample side by side comparisons V10 Tony Mallia 12/1/15 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Contents 1 Datatypes (section
A FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECT AND SEMANTICS BASED TRANSFORMATION FROM RELATIONAL DATABASE TO ONTOLOGY
A FRAMEWORK FOR DIRECT AND SEMANTICS BASED TRANSFORMATION FROM RELATIONAL DATABASE TO ONTOLOGY 1 C.RAMATHILAGAM, 2 Dr.M.L.VALARMATHI 1 Asstt Prof, Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Adithya
OWL-based reasoning with retractable inference
OWL-based reasoning with retractable inference Carlo Jelmini and Stéphane Marchand-Maillet Viper Group CVML University of Geneva 1211 Geneva 4 Switzerland {jelmini, marchand}@cui.unige.ch Abstract As a
Semantic Web Technologies Web Ontology Language (OWL) Part II. Heiko Paulheim
Semantic Web Technologies Web Ontology Language (OWL) Part II Previously on Semantic Web Technologies We have got to know OWL, a more powerful ontology language than RDFS Simple ontologies and some reasoning
Querying Data through Ontologies
Querying Data through Ontologies Instructor: Sebastian Link Thanks to Serge Abiteboul, Ioana Manolescu, Philippe Rigaux, Marie-Christine Rousset and Pierre Senellart Web Data Management and Distribution
Comparison of Semantic Web serialization syntaxes
Comparison of Semantic Web serialization syntaxes Tony Mallia Edmond Scientific 7 March 2015 Introduction This is the comparison of serialization syntaxes supported by Protégé. The sample contains two
A CONCEPTUAL SCHEMA BASED ON RDFS-OWL AND CONSISTENCY CONSTRAINT CHECKING WITH XQuery*
A CONCEPTUAL SCHEMA BASED ON RDFS-OWL AND CONSISTENCY CONSTRAINT CHECKING WITH XQuery* OVILIANI YENTY YULIANA Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science
ROWLBAC Representing Role Based Access Control in OWL
T. Finin A. Joshi J. Niu R. Sandhu W. Winsborough B. Thuraisingham a presentation by Jeremy Clark ROWLBAC Representing Role Based Access Control in OWL Introduction This paper examines the relationship
OWLET: An Object-Oriented Environment for OWL Ontology Management
Proceedings of the 11th WSEAS International Conference on COMPUTERS, Agios Nikolaos, Crete Island, Greece, July 26-28, 2007 44 OWLET: An Object-Oriented Environment for OWL Ontology Management Agostino
Formal Modeling in Context Aware Systems
Formal Modeling in Context Aware Systems Anjum Shehzad, Hung Q. Ngo, Kim Anh Pham, and S. Y. Lee Computer Engineering Dept. Kyung Hee University 449-701 Suwon, Republic of Korea {anjum, nqhung, kimanh,
The P2 Registry
The P2 Registry -------------------------------------- Where the Semantic Web and Web 2.0 meet Digital Preservation David Tarrant, Steve Hitchcock & Les Carr davetaz / sh94r / lac @ecs.soton.ac.uk School
INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017
INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017 Lecture 10: OWL, the Web Ontology Language Leif Harald Karlsen 20th March 2017 Department of Informatics University of Oslo Reminders Oblig. 5: First deadline
Automatic Transformation of Relational Database Schema into OWL Ontologies
Environment. Technology. Resources, Rezekne, Latvia Proceedings of the 10 th International Scientific and Practical Conference. Volume III, 217-222 Automatic Transformation of Relational Database Schema
Representing Security Policies in Web Information Systems
Representing Security Policies in Web Information Systems Félix J. García Clemente Gregorio Martínez Pérez Juan A. Botía Blaya Antonio F. Gómez-Skarmeta {fgarcia, gregorio, skarmeta}@dif.um.es, juanbot@um.es
INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012
INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012 Lecture 10: OWL, the Web Ontology Language Martin G. Skjæveland 20th March 2012 Department of Informatics University of Oslo Outline Reminder: RDFS 1 Reminder:
2. RDF Semantic Web Basics Semantic Web
2. RDF Semantic Web Basics Semantic Web Prof. Dr. Bernhard Humm Faculty of Computer Science Hochschule Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences Summer semester 2011 1 Agenda Semantic Web Basics Literature
Ontological Modeling: Part 15
Ontological Modeling: Part 15 Terry Halpin INTI International University This is the fifteenth article in a series on ontology-based approaches to modeling. The main focus is on popular ontology languages
Goals. Introduction to Ontologybased. Service Semantics. Functional Semantics. Need more than XML Schema. Non-functional Semantics
Goals Introduction to Ontologybased Semantics Semantic Web, ontologies, RDF, OWL, N3 With thanks to Declan O Sullivan To provide some insight into the usefulness of ontologies To provide an understanding
OWL 2 Web Ontology Language:Mapping to RDF Graphs W3C Working Draft 02 December 2008
OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Mapping to RDF Graphs W3C Working Draft 02 December 2008 This version: Latest version: http://www.w3.org/tr/owl2-mapping-to-rdf/ Previous version: http://www.w3.org/tr/2008/wd-owl2-mapping-to-rdf-20081008/
MASON: A Proposal For An Ontology Of Manufacturing Domain
MASON: A Proposal For An Ontology Of Manufacturing Domain Séverin Lemaignan 1,2, Ali Siadat 1, Jean-Yves Dantan 1, Anatoli Semenenko 2 1 LGIPM - École Nationale Supérieure d Arts et Métiers 4 rue Augustin
Easing the Definition of N Ary Relations for Supporting Spatio Temporal Models in OWL
Easing the Definition of N Ary Relations for Supporting Spatio Temporal Models in OWL Alberto G. Salguero, Cecilia Delgado, and Francisco Araque Dpt. of Computer Languages and Systems University of Granada,
Why Ontologies? RRDIU - Semantic Web 2
Ontologies OWL2 Why Ontologies? 2019-01-21 01RRDIU - Semantic Web 2 Semantics Knowledge Organizazion Systems Term Lists Authority files Glossaries Dictionaries, Vocabularies Gazetteers Classifications
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='iso '?> <!DOCTYPE rdf:rdf [ <!ENTITY rdf 'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'> <!
Ontological Modeling: Part 14
Ontological Modeling: Part 14 Terry Halpin INTI International University This is the fourteenth in a series of articles on ontology-based approaches to modeling. The main focus is on popular ontology languages
Building Blocks of Linked Data
Building Blocks of Linked Data Technological foundations Identifiers: URIs Data Model: RDF Terminology and Semantics: RDFS, OWL 23,019,148 People s Republic of China 20,693,000 population located in capital
Translating a Typical Business Process Modelling Language to a Web Services Ontology through Lightweight Mapping
Translating a Typical Business Process Modelling Language to a Web Services Ontology through Lightweight Mapping Gayathri Nadarajan 1 Yun-Heh Chen-Burger 2 Centre for Intelligent Systems and their Applications
The Semantic Web. Mansooreh Jalalyazdi
1 هو العليم 2 The Semantic Web Mansooreh Jalalyazdi 3 Content Syntactic web XML Add semantics Representation Language RDF, RDFS OWL Query languages 4 History of the Semantic Web Tim Berners-Lee vision
CC LA WEB DE DATOS PRIMAVERA Lecture 4: Web Ontology Language (I) Aidan Hogan
CC6202-1 LA WEB DE DATOS PRIMAVERA 2015 Lecture 4: Web Ontology Language (I) Aidan Hogan aidhog@gmail.com PREVIOUSLY ON LA WEB DE DATOS (1) Data, (2) Rules/Ontologies, (3) Query, RDF: Resource Description
Syntactic Sugar: owl:disjointunionof and negative Assertions objectpropertyassertion vs. negativeobjectpropertyassertion.
DATATYPES:... DECIMAL DOES NOT YET WORK @prefix rdfs: . @prefix xsd: . @prefix : . :value a owl:functionalproperty; a
OWL Concepts. Last Modified Tuesday, July 21, 2009 at 01:41:30 PM Document Revision: 65
OWL Concepts Much of the information contained in this document was pulled from, or at least strongly inspired from, the Protégé mailing list. You can be sure that the errors are my own, however. Given
Reasoning with the Web Ontology Language (OWL)
Reasoning with the Web Ontology Language (OWL) JESSE WEAVER, PH.D. Fundamental & Computational Sciences Directorate, Senior Research Computer Scientist Discovery 2020 Short Course on Semantic Data Analysis
JOURNAL OF OBJECT TECHNOLOGY
JOURNAL OF OBJECT TECHNOLOGY Online at http://www.jot.fm. Published by ETH Zurich, Chair of Software Engineering JOT, 2005 Vol. 4, No. 1, January-February 2005 Ontology Modeling and MDA Dragan Djurić,
For return on 19 January 2018 (late submission: 2 February 2018)
Semantic Technologies Autumn 2017 Coursework For return on 19 January 2018 (late submission: 2 February 2018) Electronic submission:.pdf and.owl files only 1. (6%) Consider the following XML document:
Semantic Web. {:Philly ETE} What It Is and Why You Should Care. {:Speakers} {:Ted Coyle} {:Brian Mackay} {:4/9/2010} twitter:brianmackay}
Semantic Web What It Is and Why You Should Care {:Speakers} {:Ted Coyle} {:Brian Mackay} {:Philly ETE} {:4/9/2010} twitter:brianmackay} {twitter:tedc} Semantic Web {:Overview: {:Origins} {:Reality} {:Tools}
Publishing OWL ontologies with Presto
Publishing OWL ontologies with Presto Alexander De Leon 1 and 1,2 1 School of Computer Science 2 Department of Biology Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S5B6 Canada Presented
Time in OWL-S. Feng Pan and Jerry R. Hobbs
Time in OWL-S Feng Pan and Jerry R. Hobbs University of Southern California / Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey, CA 90292 {pan, hobbs}@isi.edu Abstract To provide support
Publishing Data Using Semantic Web Technologies
Publishing Data Using Semantic Web Technologies An introduction for software engineers Nikolaos Konstantinou, Ph.D. National Documentation Centre / N.H.R.F. Lecture Outline Introduction to the Semantic
Interoperable Petri Net Models via Ontology. Dragan V. Gašević and Vladan B. Devedžić
Int. J. of Web Engineering and Technology, Vol. 2, No.2, 2006 Interoperable Petri Net Models via Ontology Dragan V. Gašević and Vladan B. Devedžić GOOD OLD AI Research Group FON School of Business Administration
Ontology-based Virtual IoT Devices for Edge Computing
Ontology-based Virtual IoT Devices for Edge Computing The 8th International Conference on the Internet of Things (IoT 2018) Santa Barbara, California, USA October 15 18, 2018 Kristina Sahlmann, Thomas
Deriving OWL Ontologies from UML Models: an Enterprise Modelling Approach.
Deriving OWL Ontologies from UML Models: an Enterprise Modelling Approach. Dr. Sergio Viademonte, Dr. Zhan Cui. British Telecom, GCTO Adastral Park, Ipswich IP5 3RE, UK sergio.viademontedarosa@bt.com zhan.cui@bt.com
Describing the P3P base data schema using OWL
Describing the P3P base data schema using OWL Giles Hogben, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Via Enrico Fermi 1, 21020 VA, Ispra, Italy +39 0332789187 giles.hogben@jrc.it ABSTRACT This paper