[rules-users] Using an OWL Ontology in drools - advice

[Davide Sottara]

Hi Anton, 
I'm (un)officially in charge of the topic. Right now I have identified the
following topics/tasks, feel free to ask for more details on any one of
them:

1) Use the ontology to create a fact model to write rules with : I'm
perfecting the tool even now, in a few days the alpha version will be
available for testing. 
It's meant to be pretty flexible, support many persistency techniques,
provide convenience methods and will be integrated with the recent
"traiting" (dynamic typing) technique. 
It makes some (reasonable) assumptions on the ontology, and would need use
cases and consolidations. 

1b) Once the fact model is there, we'd have to instantiate the individuals
in the ontology as facts
1c) We have a side project to make this compatible with guvnor, to edit
"semantically constrained" rules.

2) Use the definitions in the ontology to create classification rules. Would
be "rule-style", in close world assumptions. My feeling is that it would
create an execution framework for a SPIN-like language (or, if you prefer, a
DRL version of the SPIN framework).
I haven't started it yet, but could be done in a relatively few days

3) Use the definitions in the ontology to create a rule-based,
object-oriented semantic reasoner. A proof of concept for a fuzzy semantic
reasoner exists, but that definitely is on the TODO list. Help, as always,
is appreciated :)
This would be a necessary complement to the fact model, to ensure it's kept
consistent with the ontology.



--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/rules-users-Using-an-OWL-Ontology-in-drools-advice-tp3724566p3724602.html
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.