In this context I would like to emphasize that I'm prepared to pay for a Pellet 2.0 integration, but it needs to be one that is sufficient performant, which is not the case with Pellet 1.0.
Running inferences on one example owl file takes forever. This problem has been mentioned before by other users and has some technical reasons (integration Eclipse and Pellet's Jena API). However the same file used in Swoop with reasoner Pellet only takes seconds. If we have to pay for Pellet 2.0 I do not want to change anymore to another tool for inferencing. One can say, use another engine, but Pellet is the only one with explanations, a feature I need to compensate for my own imperfections :-). Paul On Oct 30, 8:30 pm, Holger Knublauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear TopBraid users, > > With the release ofPellet2.0 and its new dual licensing model, > TopQuadrant is considering options regarding inclusion ofPelletin > future releases of TopBraid products. To better understand how > frequently TBC users utilizePellettoday and how important the > reasoning support for the new features in OWL 2.0 is to their work, we > would greatly appreciate it if you would fill in a very short survey > (max 7 questions, ~ 3 minutes or less) about your use of inferencing > within TopBraid Composer. > > Please access the survey at:http://www.polldaddy.com/s/710D742112A66E25/ > > The survey will be open for responses only until COB Monday, November > 10, 2008. > > Thanks in advance for your help and participation. > Holger --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
