• Create BookmarkCreate Bookmark
  • Create Note or TagCreate Note or Tag
  • PrintPrint
Share this Page URL
Help

12. Ontologies: RDF Business Models > 12.7. The Complementary Nature of RDF and...

The Complementary Nature of RDF and OWL

Previous sections barely skimmed the richness of OWL, though they have shown that regardless of the complexity of the constructs, they remain valid RDF/XML. In fact, if you open up the Wine ontology that the OWL group uses for its examples, located at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/wine.owl, you’ll find that it validates. You’ll want to turn on the graph option first, and you should be prepared to wait because wine.owl is quite large.

So, when should you use just RDF Schema and when should you use OWL?

If you’re defining a fairly simple vocabulary primarily for your own use (and I use RDF/XML for a dozen different little applications at my site), and if you’re concerned primarily with the striped nature of RDF/XML, you’ll most likely want to just define your vocabulary in RDF and RDFS.


PREVIEW

                                                                          

Not a subscriber?

Start A Free Trial


  
  • Creative Edge
  • Create BookmarkCreate Bookmark
  • Create Note or TagCreate Note or Tag
  • PrintPrint