Ian Horrocks

References

(Horrocks, 2011) ⇒ Ian Horrocks. (2011). “Tool Support for Ontology Engineering." Springer Berlin Heidelberg,

(Motik et al., 2009) ⇒ Boris Motik, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Zhe Wu, Achille Fokoue, and Carsten Lutz. (2009). “OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Profiles." W3C Recommendation.

(Horrocks et al., 2004) ⇒ Ian Horrocks, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Harold Boley, Said Tabet, Benjamin Grosof, and Mike Dean. (2004). “SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML." W3C Member Submission, 21 May 2004.
- See: SWRL Standard

(Bechhofer et al., 2004) ⇒ Sean Bechhofer, Frank van Harmelen, Jim Hendler, Ian Horrocks, Deborah L. McGuinness, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Lynn Andrea Stein. (2004). “OWL Web Ontology Language Reference." W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004.
- ABSTRACT: The Web Ontology Language OWL is a semantic markup language for publishing and sharing ontologies on the World Wide Web. OWL is developed as a vocabulary extension of RDF (the Resource Description Framework) and is derived from the DAML+OIL Web Ontology Language. This document contains a structured informal description of the full set of OWL language constructs and is meant to serve as a reference for OWL users who want to construct OWL ontologies.

(Horrocks et al., 2003) ⇒ Ian Horrocks, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Frank van Harmelen. (2003). “From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a Web Ontology Language.” In: Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 1(1). doi:10.1016/j.websem.2003.07.001
- CITED BY: ~1,036 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22From+SHIQ+and+RDF+to+OWL%3A+the+making+of+a+Web+Ontology+Language%22+2003
- ABSTRACT: The OWL Web Ontology Language is a new formal language for representing ontologies in the Semantic Web. OWL has features from several families of representation languages, including primarily Description Logics and frames. OWL also shares many characteristics with RDF, the W3C base of the Semantic Web. In this paper, we discuss how the philosophy and features of OWL can be traced back to these older formalisms, with modifications driven by several other constraints on OWL. Several interesting problems have arisen where these influences on OWL have clashed.
- AUTHOR KEYWORDS: Ontologies; Semantic Web; Description Logics; Frames; RDF

(Horrocks et al., 1999) ⇒ Ian Horrocks, Ulrike Sattler, and Stephan Tobies. (1999). “Practical Reasoning for Expressive Description Logics.” In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR 1999).
- ABSTRACT: Description Logics (DLs) axe a family of knowledge representation formetlisms mainly chauracterised by constructors to build complex concepts and iroles from atomic ones. Expressive role constructors are important in many applications, but can be computationally problematical. We present an algorithm that decides satisfiability of the DL ACC extended with transitive eind inverse roles, role hierarchies, and quaJifying number restrictions. Early experiments indicate that this algorithm is well-suited for implementation. Additionally, we show that ACC extended with just transitive and inverse roles is still in PSPACE. Finally, we investigate the limits of decidability for this family of DLs.
- CITED BY ~527 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Practical+reasoning+for+expressive+description+logics%22+1999