OWL 2 Web Ontology Language

By Manchester Syntax, Matthew Horridge, Peter F. Patel-Schneider. 2009

596 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9f84c80290d6c5caabec589ac236f1765189f37f

How researchers see this paper

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

1. C. Mungall
2. Judith A. Blake
3. Melissa A. Haendel
4. A. Diehl
5. Matthew H. Brush
6. Jean-Baptiste Lamy
7. T. Meehan
8. Yvonne M. Bradford

Citations in the corpus

• The Cell Ontology 2016: enhanced content, modularization, and ontology interoperability (2016, methodology): “We previously reported on improvements to this methodology, specifically leveraging the OWL2 ontology language [45] and associated tooling such as OWL reasoners, and the Protégé 5.”
• Owlready: Ontology-oriented programming in Python with automatic classification and high level constructs for biomedical ontologies (2017, background): “The W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) proposed OWL (Web Ontology Language) [2] for formalizing ontologies, and OWL ontologies are often represented as RDF graphs (Resource Description Framework) [3].”