Dynamic Ontologies on the Web

By Jeff Heflin, J. Hendler. AAAI/IAAI, 2000

372 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Networks and Communications, Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/604f4c9dcb4c33652428ea76a62b01344dc8bc49

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

1. Ljiljana Stojanović
2. Ian Horrocks
3. Mark A. Musen
4. Peter F. Patel-Schneider
5. Dieter A. Fensel
6. Natasha Noy
7. Frank van Harmelen
8. Michel C. A. Klein

In Computer Networks and Communications

1. Ljiljana Stojanović
2. Ian Horrocks
3. Natasha Noy
4. Peter F. Patel-Schneider
5. Mark A. Musen
6. Dieter A. Fensel
7. Michel C. A. Klein
8. Frank van Harmelen

In Information Systems

1. Ljiljana Stojanović
2. Ian Horrocks
3. Natasha Noy
4. Mark A. Musen
5. Dieter A. Fensel
6. Peter F. Patel-Schneider
7. Michel C. A. Klein
8. Frank van Harmelen

Citations in the corpus

• Methods and tools for ontology evolution (2004, background): “15 Essentially an ontology can be thought of as a tuple (V,A), where V is the vocabulary and A is the set of assertions governing the theory [54].”
• Ontology versioning on the Semantic Web (2001, background): “The distinction between individual ontologies on the one hand and lines of backward compatible ontologies on the other hand, provides a simple way to indicate a very general type of compatibility, likewise the “BACKWARD-COMPATIBLE-WITH” field in SHOE (Heflin and Hendler, 2000).”
• Combining and relating ontologies: an analysis of problems and solutions (2001, background): “SHOE (Heflin and Hendler, 2000) is an is an HTML-based ontology language.”
• Ontology Versioning and Change Detection on the Web (2002, background): “The distinction between individual ontologies on the one hand and lines of backward compatible ontologies on the other hand, provides a simple way to indicate a very general type of compatibility, likewise the “BACKWARD-COMPATIBLE-WITH” field in SHOE [13].”
• Promptdiff: a fixed-point algorithm for comparing ontology versions (2002, background): “Current research in ontology versioning has addressed two issues: (1) identifying ontology versions in a distributed environments such as the Semantic Web (Klein & Fensel 2001) and (2) specifying explicitly logs of changes between versions (Oliver et al. 1999; Heflin & Hendler 2000 ).”
• From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a Web Ontology Language (2003, background): “One of the first attempts at defining an ontology language for deployment on the Web was SHOE [28].”
• Ontology-Based Integration of Information - A Survey of Existing Approaches (2001, methodology): “Approaches which are developed to be used on the World Wide Web are Ontobroker [Fensel et al., 1998] and SHOE [Heflin and Hendler, 2000b].”