Hier finden Sie wissenschaftliche Publikationen aus den Fraunhofer-Instituten.

Towards Reusability in the Semantic Web. Decoupling Naming, Validation, and Reasoning

: Lipp, Johannes; Gleim, Lars; Decker, Stefan

Postprint urn:nbn:de:0011-n-6061121 (232 KByte PDF)
MD5 Fingerprint: 7fd191846d07bee6badad83cf72cb95d
Erstellt am: 5.11.2020

11th Workshop on Ontology Design and Patterns, WOP 2020. Online resource : Held in conjunction with ISWC 2020, 19th International Semantic Web Conference, Athens, Greece, November 1st, 2020, Virtual Workshop
Online im WWW, 2020
7 S.
Workshop on Ontology Design and Patterns (WOP) <11, 2020, Online>
International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) <19, 2020, Online>
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG
Exzellenzcluster; 390621612
Internet of Production
Konferenzbeitrag, Elektronische Publikation
Fraunhofer FIT ()
Semantic Web Stack; Ontology Design Pattern; Naming; validation; reasoning; Integrity Constraints; interoperability

RDFS and OWL ontologies simultaneously define naming, hierarchy, syntactical data structure, and axioms. This strong coupling complicates the reusability of both ontological concepts and annotated data, due to logical pitfalls in RDFS and OWL semantics. The differences between OWL axioms and integrity constraints used for validation are often not clear to users and lead to confusing and unintended semantics in practice. To avoid these pitfalls, we revisit Tom Gruber's basic ontology definition and reimagine a more decoupled ontology design pattern, consisting of independent layers for naming, validation, and reasoning. We argue that such decoupling improves reusability because it clarifies the usage of the three layers during ontology creation and reuse. A naming layer built on synonym sets enables reusing named concepts in different contexts, detached from constraints or OWL axioms defined elsewhere. On top of that, we suggest a two-step approach of constraint checking and reasoning: Validate a term's integrity via constraints first, and only include it for reasoning if that validation succeeds. Our proposal is one step towards a clearer in-practice usage of naming, validation, and reasoning-and additionally supports this with a revised semantic layer model.