# Answers0

Q40AdditionalComments:
Just an observer's comments. I am afraid I am too ignorant of the technical aspects to offer more but I continue to be interested in the results.


Q22SupportiveToolProvider-1:
There's an open source tool for browsing KIF-based theories at <http://virtual.cvut.cz/kifb/en/> with download at <http://einstein.teknowledge.com:8080/SUMO/SUMO_register.jsp?fileType=.zip&fileName=kifb-1-8.tar.gz>. It's free.

Q30StdOntologyLanguages:
Unless you want a lossy translation, you'll have to use the most expressive language, like KIF.  If you try to express a KIF theory in DAML, all the rules are lost.

Q40AdditionalComments:
Having all ontologies expressed in the same language would be a great start.  People continually reinvent the same ontologies in different languages.  Once that is done, some serious work can start at comparing and integrating existing ontologies.  That's the approach we took to create the initial versions of SUMO <http://ontology.teknowledge.com>


Q13NoneOfTheAbove-1:
You may want to consider having a tool hints/help/advise section in addition to 1 a) and/or b).

Q21ToolCharacterization:
ORM is listed under Visio at http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/11/06/ontologies.html. I have always liked it. VisioModeler uses ORM and is available unsupported at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/release.asp?ReleaseID=27489 . The supported version of ORM is in Visio Enterprise (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/techinfo/articles/developerproductivity/orm.asp) as part of Visual Studio .NET  Enterprise Architect Edition. Visual Studio .NET Enterprise Architect cost about $2.5K. To my knowledge, none of these tools are Web enabled. ORM has tended to be used to develop relational databases even though constraints, etc. are often lost in the process or have to be implemented procedurally.

Q30StdOntologyLanguages:
May be too many languages available to make a choice. You probably have to let the market decide.

Q40AdditionalComments:
On whether our site should support an ontology repository, my answer is "maybe".


Q13NoneOfTheAbove-1:
Look at what is available without reinventing the wheel

Q40AdditionalComments:
Let's have a glossary to easily understand, yet more acronyms for semantics....hmmmm.


Q21ToolCharacterization:
These are all free. OntoEdit non-demo can be purchased for about $895.

Q30StdOntologyLanguages:
KIF and Common Logic (the new ISO KIF) are the most expressive. OKBC is mostly equivalent to KIF. OWL will be the top Semantic Web ontology language.


Q21ToolCharacterization:
1. Client/Server, Java-based, XOL, Verticalnet Proprietary 2. Client-based, open source, Java, free.


Q30StdOntologyLanguages:
OWL, (Depends on MARKET FEATURES ELABORATED and tested in some mechanism)

Q40AdditionalComments:
Wish we had some opportunity to discuss some logistic issues at the Santae Fe Open Session in January.


Q13NoneOfTheAbove-1:
As long as it is user-friendly, otherwise you may just want to accept uploads from other tools like Protege or OntoEdit.

Q30StdOntologyLanguages:
Not being familiar with the subtle differences between the languages -- I would say the safest bet is RDF/S, DAML+OIL and OWL.

Q40AdditionalComments:
How would this repository differ from the DAML+OIL ontology listings on the DAML site?


