Scott and Irene, many thanks. Your response was very informative. While I am new to this domain, it is quite clear which vendors are the leaders. The discussion here on the mailing list is fantastic and all one has to do is look at all the talent migrating to your company to see how this is all going to pan out.
I remain a fan of your product and your support. --tk On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Irene Polikoff <[email protected]>wrote: > > Hi tk, > > If you remove TBC and develop an application directly against an RDF store, > then you your best bet is to contact the RDF store vendors to see what type > of reasoning they can support. Each has its own capabilities and > limitations. > > Decision will depend on the application you are developing, the kind of > queries you foresee needing and the type of architecture you will decide > on. > For example, sometimes inferencing is performed at the query time, but > there > are also architectures where it is done offline in a batch mode. > > If you want to consider staying with the TopBraid Suite for your > application > development, then you should take a look at SPIN: > http://www.topquadrant.com/topbraid/composer/spin.html. Also, check out > Holger's recent blogs about SPIN > http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com/. SPIN inferencing is > available not only in TBC, but also in TopBraid Live and Ensemble. Since > SPIN is in SPARQL it works with any RDF backend. > > One of the key accomplishments of OWL 2.0 working group was defining OWL > profiles: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-profiles-20081202/. SPIN can > be > used to realize OWL 2 RL profile. I believe Holger already made some > progress towards it by expressing a number of key RDFS and OWL axioms as > SPIN rules. Over and above standard OWL semantics, SPIN supports domain > specific constraints and rules. > > Regards, > > > Irene Polikoff > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of TK > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 10:46 PM > To: TopBraid Composer Users > Subject: [tbc-users] reasoner support and production architectures > > > Hello, I'm very new to this and have a few questions about product > development that leverages backend reasoners and RDF-Stores. > > I'm a user of TBC 2.6.2 and given the powerful reasoners in the product I > have been able to create some very powerful semantic models. The more > ellaborate ones make full use of OWL and go well beyond RDFS. > > In my quest to move these models into a production system, my first guess > was to just use AllegroGraph 3.1.1. > But upon investigation, when TBC is backended with AllegroGraph, the > reasoning is still performed in TBC's IDE. > If I remove TBC, AllegroGraph only has a limited set of constructs > from OWL within its native reasoner it called RDFS++. The > AllegroGraph website essentially says that if I want an fully supported OWL > reasoner, I need to be using RACERPRO along with AllegroGraph. > > My question is: if I do most of my modeling with the TBC/AllegroGraph > combination, what are my choices regarding reasoners when I remove TBC and > look to develop an application around that ontological backend store? > > If my question is not making sense, I'll take another shot at it. > Thanks in advanced, > --tk > > > > > -- "The nervous system organizes itself so as to compute a stable reality" - Maturana & Varela --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
