Seven years on from OWL becoming a W3C recommendation, and two years on from
the more recent OWL 2 W3C recommendation, OWL has still experienced only patchy
uptake on the Web. Although certain OWL features (like owl:sameAs) are very
popular, other features of OWL are largely neglected by publishers in the
Linked Data world. This may suggest that despite the promise of easy
implementations and the proposal of tractable profiles suggested in OWL's
second version, there is still no "right" standard fragment for the Linked Data
community. In this paper, we (1) analyse uptake of OWL on the Web of Data, (2)
gain insights into the OWL fragment that is actually used/usable on the Web,
where we arrive at the conclusion that this fragment is likely to be a
simplified profile based on OWL RL, (3) propose and discuss such a new
fragment, which we call OWL LD (for Linked Data).
%0 Generic
%1 Glimm2012
%A Glimm, Birte
%A Hogan, Aidan
%A Krötzsch, Markus
%A Polleres, Axel
%D 2012
%K owl rdf reasoners semantic_web
%T OWL: Yet to arrive on the Web of Data?
%U http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.0984v1
%X Seven years on from OWL becoming a W3C recommendation, and two years on from
the more recent OWL 2 W3C recommendation, OWL has still experienced only patchy
uptake on the Web. Although certain OWL features (like owl:sameAs) are very
popular, other features of OWL are largely neglected by publishers in the
Linked Data world. This may suggest that despite the promise of easy
implementations and the proposal of tractable profiles suggested in OWL's
second version, there is still no "right" standard fragment for the Linked Data
community. In this paper, we (1) analyse uptake of OWL on the Web of Data, (2)
gain insights into the OWL fragment that is actually used/usable on the Web,
where we arrive at the conclusion that this fragment is likely to be a
simplified profile based on OWL RL, (3) propose and discuss such a new
fragment, which we call OWL LD (for Linked Data).
@misc{Glimm2012,
abstract = { Seven years on from OWL becoming a W3C recommendation, and two years on from
the more recent OWL 2 W3C recommendation, OWL has still experienced only patchy
uptake on the Web. Although certain OWL features (like owl:sameAs) are very
popular, other features of OWL are largely neglected by publishers in the
Linked Data world. This may suggest that despite the promise of easy
implementations and the proposal of tractable profiles suggested in OWL's
second version, there is still no "right" standard fragment for the Linked Data
community. In this paper, we (1) analyse uptake of OWL on the Web of Data, (2)
gain insights into the OWL fragment that is actually used/usable on the Web,
where we arrive at the conclusion that this fragment is likely to be a
simplified profile based on OWL RL, (3) propose and discuss such a new
fragment, which we call OWL LD (for Linked Data).
},
added-at = {2012-02-07T09:18:56.000+0100},
author = {Glimm, Birte and Hogan, Aidan and Krötzsch, Markus and Polleres, Axel},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/252feef43927caed4758aacbbbefd929a/maxirichter},
description = {OWL: Yet to arrive on the Web of Data?},
interhash = {143b251995da49971f0055fe075b4c5a},
intrahash = {52feef43927caed4758aacbbbefd929a},
keywords = {owl rdf reasoners semantic_web},
note = {cite arxiv:1202.0984},
timestamp = {2012-02-07T09:18:56.000+0100},
title = {OWL: Yet to arrive on the Web of Data?},
url = {http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.0984v1},
year = 2012
}