Desirable Ontologies for the Construction of Semantic Applications

The intended goal of semantic web is to provide the search results to the user with at most accuracy and good precision. To make possible, the object of semantic web is to add semantics to the existing information on the Web using semantic web languages. These web languages have been to express detail information of the content present on the web with help of Ontologies. Ontology is expressed in a knowledge representation language, which provides a formal frame of semantics. Therefore we provide a brief explanation of semantic web languages in which some of them uses description logic and frames as basis. These semantic languages used in construction and understanding of ontologies clearly. The goal of this paper is to provide a brief survey of state-of-the-art ontology languages which are used to express ontology over the Web, a basic understanding of ontologies and how the ontologies are constructed

Survey over Existing Query and Transformation Languages

A widely acknowledged obstacle for realizing the vision of the Semantic Web is the inability of many current Semantic Web approaches to cope with data available in such diverging representation formalisms as XML, RDF, or Topic Maps. A common query language is the first step to allow transparent access to data in any of these formats. To further the understanding of the requirements and approaches proposed for query languages in the conventional as well as the Semantic Web, this report surveys a large number of query languages for accessing XML, RDF, or Topic Maps. This is the first systematic survey to consider query languages from all these areas. From the detailed survey of these query languages, a common classification scheme is derived that is useful for understanding and differentiating languages within and among all three areas

A Review of Accessing Big Data with Significant Ontologies

Ontology Based Data Access (OBDA) is a recently proposed approach which is able to provide a conceptual view on relational data sources. It addresses the problem of the direct access to big data through providing end-users with an ontology that goes between users and sources in which the ontology is connected to the data via mappings. We introduced the languages used to represent the ontologies and the mapping assertions technique that derived the query answering from sources. Query answering is divided into two steps: (i) Ontology rewriting, in which the query is rewritten with respect to the ontology into new query; (ii) mapping rewriting the query that obtained from previous step reformulating it over the data sources using mapping assertions. In this survey, we aim to study the earlier works done by other researchers in the fields of ontology, mapping and query answering over data sources

Drawing OWL 2 ontologies with Eddy the editor

In this paper we introduce Eddy, a new open-source tool for the graphical editing of OWL~2 ontologies. Eddy is specifically designed for creating ontologies in Graphol, a completely visual ontology language that is equivalent to OWL~2. Thus, in Eddy ontologies are easily drawn as diagrams, rather than written as sets of formulas, as commonly happens in popular ontology design and engineering environments. This makes Eddy particularly suited for usage by people who are more familiar with diagramatic languages for conceptual modeling rather than with typical ontology formalisms, as is often required in non-academic and industrial contexts. Eddy provides intuitive functionalities for specifying Graphol diagrams, guarantees their syntactic correctness, and allows for exporting them in standard OWL 2 syntax. A user evaluation study we conducted shows that Eddy is perceived as an easy and intuitive tool for ontology specification

Survey-based naming conventions for use in OBO Foundry ontology development

A wide variety of ontologies relevant to the biological and medical domains are available through the OBO Foundry portal, and their number is growing rapidly. Integration of these ontologies, while requiring considerable effort, is extremely desirable. However, heterogeneities in format and style pose serious obstacles to such integration. In particular, inconsistencies in naming conventions can impair the readability and navigability of ontology class hierarchies, and hinder their alignment and integration. While other sources of diversity are tremendously complex and challenging, agreeing a set of common naming conventions is an achievable goal, particularly if those conventions are based on lessons drawn from pooled practical experience and surveys of community opinion. We summarize a review of existing naming conventions and highlight certain disadvantages with respect to general applicability in the biological domain. We also present the results of a survey carried out to establish which naming conventions are currently employed by OBO Foundry ontologies and to determine what their special requirements regarding the naming of entities might be. Lastly, we propose an initial set of typographic, syntactic and semantic conventions for labelling classes in OBO Foundry ontologies. Adherence to common naming conventions is more than just a matter of aesthetics. Such conventions provide guidance to ontology creators, help developers avoid flaws and inaccuracies when editing, and especially when interlinking, ontologies. Common naming conventions will also assist consumers of ontologies to more readily understand what meanings were intended by the authors of ontologies used in annotating bodies of data