%0 Journal Article %1 fensel01 %A Fensel, D. %A v. van Harmelen, F. %A Horrocks, I. %A Mcguinness, D. %A Schneider, Patel P. %D 2001 %J IEEE Intelligent Systems %K AI RDF inference knowledge representation semantic web %P 38--45 %T OIL: An Ontology Infrastructure for the World Wide Web %U http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~nernst/papers/mcguiness-daml+oil-is.pdf

@article{fensel01, added-at = {2006-10-23T17:25:28.000+0200}, author = {Fensel, D. and v. van Harmelen, F. and Horrocks, I. and Mcguinness, D. and Schneider, Patel P.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c69486297b863d6a84cca4c1871bb85c/grahl}, citeulike-article-id = {111826}, comment = {Question- who creates the ontology? What is the info you seek to represent isn't in the default ontology? where do we draw the line between ontology and the entire representation (ie ultimately an ontology begins to approach the level of the system itself). eg metadata in GIS poorly written paper {some text representation eg ASCII/Unicode} - XML - RDF - RDFS - OIL/OWL where does XMLS fit in "XML is basically a defined way to provide a serialized syntax for tree structures" "RDF has taken an important step forward [from XML] by defining a syntactical convention and a simple data model (!) for representing machine-processable data semantics" huh? RDF is an application of XML similar to SVG (agreed upon syntax but no semantics unless provided by .... RDFS?) well-defined syntax means XML + DTD/XMLS, so an XMLS is merely a validator for the XML syntax of the document, not the semantics... i think RDFS - basic ontological modelling primitives such as is-a, contains, domain, range, etc. what is the difference between a search and a query? 3 musts for an ontology language: intuitive to human users (which) using frames, well-defined formal semantics that are complete, correct and efficient. existing languages : CycL, KIF, Ontolingua fail why? kif==CLIPS? OIL uses a DL to classify He starts to understand:: even if a knowledge representation formalism like frames forces us to consider one aspect of human intelligence, and avoids the limitations of FOL, computers STILL need to use logic to run. Otherwise they physically can't do it. We can build in all the fudging we want but ultimately computers (in their current form) have to make inferences using FOL. But, and this is a big but, I don't think this precludes us from using those other KRs, as they provide non-visible knowledge for humans which we can use amongst ourselves. And in reality, 98% of tasks we do involve inference on some small level I would think. e.g the door is locked, locked doors can be opened with the appropriate key, i have an appropriate key, therefore I can unlock the door. But is inference being used for the Bahrain chess matches? How does Kramnik discover that the computer has flaws and can never fix them? intuition, inference, what? OIL is multi-tiered, so simple inferences can be made at low level (eg RDFS) but more complex ones can be used higher up the levels (STD, INstance, Heavy) eg animal - carnivore}, description = {sdasda}, interhash = {01e94f516ddba0a63a6f3610ca988954}, intrahash = {c69486297b863d6a84cca4c1871bb85c}, journal = {IEEE Intelligent Systems}, keywords = {AI RDF inference knowledge representation semantic web}, pages = {38--45}, priority = {0}, timestamp = {2007-07-25T11:15:30.000+0200}, title = {OIL: An Ontology Infrastructure for the World Wide Web}, url = {http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~nernst/papers/mcguiness-daml+oil-is.pdf}, year = 2001 }