Primer References

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
Search
This documentation is NOT for the latest version of GraphDB.

Latest version - GraphDB 7.1

OWLIM Documentation

Next versions

OWLIM 4.4
OWLIM 5.0
OWLIM 5.1
OWLIM 5.2
OWLIM 5.3
OWLIM 5.4

GraphDB 6.0 & 6.1
GraphDB 6.2
GraphDB 6.3
GraphDB 6.4
GraphDB 6.5
GraphDB 6.6
GraphDB 7.0
GraphDB 7.1

Previous versions

OWLIM 4.2
OWLIM 4.1
OWLIM 4.0

  1. Bergmann, F.Introduction to Description Logics. Web page, http://www.fraber.de/sitec/dl.html
  2. Box, D; Ehnebuske, D; Kakivaya, G; Layman, A; Mendelsohn, N; Nielsen, H F; Thatte, S; Winer, D.Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) 1.1, W3C note, World Wide Web Consortium, May 2000 http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/
  3. Brickley, D., Guha, R.V; (eds.). Resource Description Framework(RDF) Schemas, W3C
    http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/
  4. Broekstra, J. Storage, Querying and Inferencing for Semantic WebLanguages. Ph.D. thesis, SIKS Dissertation Series No. 2005-09, ISBN 90 9019 2360, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. 2005. http://www.cs.vu.nl/~jbroeks/#pub
  5. Broekstra, J; Kampman, A; van Harmelen, F. Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema.International Semantic WebConference, Sardinia, Italy, 2002.
  6. Carroll, J J; Bizer, C; Hayes, P; Stickler, P.Named Graphs, Provenance and Trust. International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan, 2004.
  7. Carroll, J. J; De Roo, J.OWLWeb Ontology Language: Test Cases. W3C Recommendation 10 Feb. 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/
  8. Dean, M; Schreiber, G; (eds.); Bechhofer, S; van Harmelen, F; Hendler, J; Horrocks, I; McGuinness, D L; Patel-Schneider, P F; Stein, L A.OWLWeb Ontology Language Reference. _W3C Recommendation_. 10 Feb. 2004.
    http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
  9. Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1. http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/
  10. Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: Reference Description. http://dublincore.org/documents/2003/06/02/dces/
  11. Ehrig, M; Haase, P; Hefke, M; Stojanovic, N. Similarity for ontologies – a Comprehensive Framework. Proc. 13th European Conference on Information Systems, May 2005.
  12. Grosof, B; Horrocks, I; Volz, R; Decker, S. Description LogicPrograms: Combining Logic Programs with Description Logic. In Proc. of WWW2003, Budapest, May 2003.
  13. Gruber, T R. A translation approach to portable ontologies.Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2):199-220, 1993.
    http://ksl-web.stanford.edu/KSL_Abstracts/KSL-92-71.html
  14. Gruber, T R. Toward Principles for the Design of Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing. Presented at the Padua workshop on Formal Ontology. March 1993, later published in _International Journal of Human-Computer Studies_, Vol. 43, Issues 4-5, Nov. 1995, pp. 907-928. 
    http://tomgruber.org/writing/onto-design.htm
  15. Guarino, N; Giaretta, P. Ontologies and Knowledge Bases: Towards a Terminological Clarification. In N. Mars (ed.) Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases: Knowledge Building and Knowledge Sharing. IOS Press, Amsterdam: pp. 25-32. 1995
  16. Guarino, N. Formal Ontology in Information Systems. Proceedings of FOIS'98, Trento, Italy, June 6-8, 1998. Amsterdam, IOS Press. http://www.loa-cnr.it/Papers/FOIS98.pdf
  17. Hayes, P. RDF Model Theory. Working draft, World Wide Web Consortium. September 2001. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/
  18. Hayes, P. RDF Semantics. W3C Recommendation. Feb. 10, 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/
  19. Hillmann, D.; Using Dublin Core; DCMI Recommended Resource. Nov. 7, 2005
  20. Horrocks, I. Patel-Schneider, P F, Bechhofer, S, Tsarkov, D. OWLRules: A Proposal and Prototype Implementation. Journal of Web Semantics, 3 (2005), pp. 23-40.
  21. ISO. Information Technology-Database Language SQL. Standard No. ISO/IEC 9075:1999, International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 1999. (Available from American National Standards Institute, New York, NY 10036, (212) 642-4900.).
  22. KIM. Home page, http://www.ontotext.com/kim
  23. Kiryakov, A. Ontologies for Knowledge Management, Chapter 7 in: Davies, J; Studer, R; Warren, P. (eds.). Semantic WebTechnologies: Trends and Research in Ontology-based Systems. Wiley, UK, 2006.
  24. Klyne, G; Carrol , J. J; (eds). (2004).Resource Description Framework(RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax. W3C Recommendation 10 Feb. 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/
  25. Motik, B; Sattler, U; Studer R.Query Answering for OWL-DLwith Rules. Journal of Web Semantics, issue 3 (2005), pp. 41-60.
  26. Named Graphs. W3C Overview. http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/
  27. Ontology Logic and Reasoning at Semantic Karlsruhe. Home page, http://logic.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/
  28. OWLIM – Pragmatic OWL Semantic Repository. Presentation slides, Ontotext AD, 2008 http://www.ontotext.com/owlim/OWLIMPres.pdf
  29. OWLIM Tests and Benchmarks. Ontotext Lab. 2007. http://www.ontotext.com/owlim/v2.9.0/doc/OWLIMTest.pdf
  30. Popov, B; Kiryakov, A; Kirilov, A; Manov, D; Ognyanoff, D; Goranov, M. KIM – Semantic Annotation Platform. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2003, Sanibel Island, USA, 2003.
  31. PROTON Ontology (PROTo Ontology). Home page. http://proton.semanticweb.org/
  32. RDF Primer. In W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/
  33. RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised). In W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/
  34. Resource Description Framework(RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax, section Graph Data Model. In W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-data-model
  35. Semantic Knowledge Technologies (SEKT). Home page. http://www.sekt-project.com/
  36. SWAD-Europe Workshop on Semantic Web Storage and Retrieval. Amsterdam, Holland, November 2003. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/dev_workshop_report_4/#owl-tiny.
  37. ter Horst, H J. Combining RDF and Part of OWLwith Rules: Semantics, Decidability, Complexity. In Proc. of ISWC 2005, Galway, Ireland, Nov. 6-10, 2005. LNCS 3729, pp. 668-684.
  38. Terziev, I; Kiryakov, A.PROTo ONtology: A Base Upper-Level Ontology for the Semantic Web, SEKT Q4 Meeting. Innsbruck, Austria., Jan. 17-19, 2005. http://proton.semanticweb.org/PROTON.ppt
  39. TRREE – Triple Reasoning and Rule Entailment Engine. Home page. http://ontotext.com/trree/
  40. Uniform Resource Identifier, Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URI
  41. User Guide of Sesame. Aduna b. v. http://www.openrdf.org/doc/sesame/users/index.html
  42. T.D. Wang, B. Parsia, and J. Hendler. A survey of the web ontology landscape. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4273:682, 2006.
  43. Hitzler, Pascal; Krötzsch, Markus; Parsia, Bijan; Patel-Schneider, Peter F.; Rudolph, Sebastian (27 October 2009). "OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Primer". OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-primer-20091027/
  44. Motik, Boris; Cuenca Grau, Bernardo; Horrocks, Ian; Wu, Zhe; Fokoue, Achille; Lutz, Carsten (27 October 2009) "OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Profiles". OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/
  45. Carroll, Jeremy; Herman, Ivan; Patel-Schneider, Peter F. (27 October 2009) "OWL 2 Web Ontology Language RDF-Based Semantics". OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-rdf-based-semantics/
  46. ter Horst, Herman J. (2005) "Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary". Journal of Web Semantics 3(2-3):79-115, 2005
  47. Patel-Schneider, Peter F.; Hayes, Patrick; Horrocks, Ian (10 February 2004) "OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax". W3C Recommendation http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/
Labels:
None
Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.