Improving the Efficiency of Owl Based Traversal in Semantic Web

ISBN-13: 9786204952987 / Angielski / Miękka / 60 str.

R. S. Ramya Harish; D. Pavai Dhanasekaran; K. N. Jayapriya Ragukanth

Opis

Ontology developers adopting OWL should consider which sub language best suits their needs. The choice between OWL Lite and OWL DL depends on the extent to which users require the more-expressive constructs provided by OWL DL. The choice between OWL DL and OWL Full mainly depends on the extent to which users require the meta-modeling facilities of RDF Schema Full implementations do not currently exist. OWL Full can be viewed as an extension of RDF, while OWL Lite and OWL DL can be viewed as extensions of a restricted view of RDF. Every OWL (Lite, DL, Full) document is an RDF document, and every RDF document is an OWL Full document, but only some RDF documents will be a legal OWL Lite or OWL DL document. When the expressiveness of OWL DL or OWL Lite is deemed appropriate, some precautions have to be taken to ensure that the original RDF document complies with the additional constraints imposed by OWL DL and OWL Lite.

O autorze

Harish, R. S. RamyaI am currently working as assistant professor in department of CSE in Kathir College of Engineering. I have 9 years of teaching experience. Currently doing my Ph.D in the area of IoT with cyber security.