Short answer: yes, that's it... Long answer:
I've created the ontologies using Protege, and uploaded them to Fuseki. When I need the ontologies in my application, Jena is used to load the ontologies from Fuseki. In most cases, I do things with Jena, specially SPARQL. But once the ontologies are stored into OntModel, they can be written to some OutputStream and read from OWLAPI. Using OWLAPI at certain application features, I'm creating some individuals and running Pellet inference, including SWRL rules (which, in my case, are defined in a separated file/graph, which is better for maintenance). There are 'tools' from OWLAPI to extract the inferred axioms only (like InferredIndividualAxiomGenerator). In my case, I'm joining the inferred axioms with the individuals and "exporting" back to Jena... from Jena it's just to upload them to Fuseki again... That may looks like an ugly and unnecessary overhead from some point of views.... but with that "architecture", I can benefit from both: Jena + Fuseki (storage and SPARQL) and OWLAPI + Pellet (Inferences, SWRL)... actually, it's a good way (or at least the one I've found) to use the power of both APIs. IMHO, there are some things easier to be done with Jena and others easier with OWLAPI (mostly because they are focused on different aspects... Jena is more "RDF-centric" and OWLAPI, "OWL-centric") Rodrigo C. Antonialli ====================================== Rio Claro - SP - Brasil LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rcantonialli Contato: [email protected] Skype: rc_antonialli On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Chris Snyder <[email protected]> wrote: > That is very helpful feedback. > > As a clarification I attempted to use the Pellet code from Maven central > and that is where I ran into the package name change issue. I might try > getting in touch with Ignazio directly to see if I can help make the > updates to get Pellet working with the latest Jena. > > If you don’t mind my asking, how are you applying the SWRL rules in > practice? E.G. are you applying the SWRL rules using the OWLAPI + Pellet > and then exporting the additional reasoned triples to your Fuseki instance > so they can be queried with SPARQL? > > Thanks, > Chris > > > > > > On Dec 8, 2015, at 3:55 PM, Rodrigo Antonialli <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > Maybe I'm not an expert to answer you properly, but I've being working > with > > this kind of scenario (Ontologies, SWRL, jena, owlapi) lately and here is > > what I can share: > > > > 1) Yes. As far as I know, Jena doesn't have native support for SWRL. > > > > 2) The most recent versions of pellet I've seen is the one from Ignazio > > Palmisano, which you can find at Maven Central > > <http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cga%7C1%7Cignazio1977>. I know it > works > > with most recent versions of OWL-API, can't tell what Jena version it > > supports now... (I don't know if he is in this mailling list, but you can > > find him in owlapi mailling list =P) > > > > 3) Can't tell for sure, once I've never used Jena Rules, but I believe > the > > differences should be around details and most things would be made with > > both. Actually, Jena Rules and SWRL are "competing" (emphasis on the > > quotes) with SPARQL SPIN from TopBraid, so it's difficult to find clear > > documented comparisons. There are a lot of considerations around the > > subject... > > > > 4) The problem with other reasoners is, usually, not Jena compatibility, > > but SWRL support... As far as I could look around, pellet is the only > > free/open-source reasoner with a good support for SWRL. I've spent some > > time looking around, because the pellet performance with SWRL is a little > > problematic when the ontology is complex, there are a great number of > > rules... Although one thing I've found to be a nice feature is the > ability > > to create custom functions for SWRL using Pellet. It was good for me to > > work with geospatial data (and now I'm trying to speed things up)... > > > > 5) "What should I use" questions are like "What's the best", and the best > > answer is: it depends... of a lot of things... I've being working with > both > > APIs and by now, I chose to use Jena to work with Fusek and SPARQL and > > OWLAPI to manipulate the ontology directly (build and manage axioms). > > Simple SPARQL queries you can change for some OWLAPI code, but the > > endpoint/tdb support in jena are an advantage. It's quite easy to work > with > > both in the same application (both API read and write from various > formats) > > > > > > Rodrigo C. Antonialli > > ====================================== > > Rio Claro - SP - Brasil > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rcantonialli > > Contato: [email protected] > > Skype: rc_antonialli > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Chris Snyder <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I have a few reasoner questions. > >> > >> 1) I’m using the latest version of Jena 3.0.0 is it true that the only > way > >> to use SWRL rules is with an external reasoner? My concern is how I > would > >> use Protege which can handle adding SWRL rules and then processing the > >> ontology with Jena. > >> > >> 2) I tried to integrate the Pellet reasoner but to get it to work with > >> Jena 3.0.0 I believe I would need to fork the Pellet code and update all > >> the Jena package paths in it to use the new “org.apache.jena.” location. > >> Can anyone comment on that? > >> > >> 3) If I am using the built in Jena reasoner is there anything major > that I > >> can not do with the Jena rule language that I could do with SWRL? > >> > >> 4) Is there an reasoner other than Pellet that someone has used with > Jena > >> 3.0.0 successfully that will process SWRL rules? > >> > >> 5) A reasoner is obviously an important part of using an ontology. Is > Jena > >> the appropriate way to go or should I be looking into the OWLAPI? > >> > >> Thanks in advance, > >> Chris > >> > >> > >> > >> > >
