JenniferVendetti: removed incorrect comment that protege doesn't support multi-user editing

2010-07-28T18:02:43Z

removed incorrect comment that protege doesn't support multi-user editing

RichMorin: Automated import of articles

2010-07-27T20:58:30Z

Automated import of articles

New page

__NOTOC__

== Selection ==

<noinclude>{{Pr4_UG_mi_TOC}}<div id='pr4_ug'></noinclude>

It's quite possible that {{#var:Pr4}}
may not be the best tool for your needs.
There are other versions of {{#var:Pr}} and, indeed,
other ontology editors and tools for knowledge management.
Each of these tools will have benefits and drawbacks for a particular use.

By pondering some of the questions below,
you may determine that {{#var:Pr4}} is not what you need.
Conversely, you may come away with a better appreciation
of why {{#var:Pr4}} is <i>just</i> the tool you need.
In either case, it will be time well spent...

=== Is an ontology really what I need? ===

Ontologies are necessary for mechanized reasoning
and useful for other purposes such as
database design and creation of standard lexicons.
The act of creating an ontology can be very valuable;
it is almost certain to uncover ambiguities and other kinds of confusion.

However, ontologies can also be difficult and time-consuming to create.
If all you need is a glossary or a thesaurus for human use,
creating an ontology is not necessarily the best approach.

=== What tools do I need? ===

Simple ontologies can be created using general-purpose tools (eg,
[{{#var:wp}}/Outliner outliners],
[{{#var:wp}}/Spreadsheet spreadsheets],
[{{#var:wp}}/Text_editor text editors]),
used in conjunction with stand-alone (eg, command-line) tools.

However, as an ontology grows in size and complexity,
this approach may become unwieldy.
Also, an integrated environment can provide convenient access
to specialized tools, views, etc.
Consequently, a variety of ontology editors have been developed.

Traditional ontologies are composed of "frames" (ie, records),
each of which has some number of attributes.
{{#var:Pr3}} supports this approach, but {{#var:Pr4}} does not.
Instead, it assists in the creation of OWL-based ontologies,
which are built out of sets of (asserted and inferred) binary relations.

If what you want is an OWL-based ontology,
either {{#var:Pr3}} or {{#var:Pr4}} may work for you.
However, Protege 3 only supports OWL 1;
if you need OWL 2 (and beyond), {{#var:Pr4}} is the right answer.

If your ontology will be based on something other than frames or OWL,
you should look elsewhere for an appropriate tool.
For example, if you expect to be creating your ontology
using [[{{#var:G}}RDF|RDF]] and [[{{#var:G}}RDFS|RDFS]],
you may wish to investigate tools such as
[http://www.topquadrant.com/products/TB_Composer.html TopBraid Composer].
See [{{#var:wp}}/Ontology_editor ontology editor (WP)] for more examples.

=== Do I want to be an early adopter? ===

{{#var:Pr3}} has been around for decades.
It is stable, robust, well-understood and -debugged, etc.
It also has a plethora of useful plugins and a large user community.
{{#var:Pr4}}, in contrast, is relatively new software,
so some of these benefits may be diminished.

If you want to be on the leading edge of OWL ontologies,
{{#var:Pr4}} is clearly the right choice.
If, however, you simply want to create a robust OWL 1 ontology,
{{#var:Pr3}} may be a better choice.

Fortunately, if all you need is OWL 1, you can use either version:
OWL 1 ontologies can be freely exchanged
between {{#var:Pr3}} and {{#var:Pr4}}.
Indeed, some users perform this action routinely,
in order to take advantage of specific program features.

=== Will this be a collaborative effort? ===

{{#var:Pr3}} and {{#var:Pr4}} are desktop applications.
So, they don't support multi-user editing, etc.
If your effort will be collaborative,
you may want to investigate
[{{#var:pws}}/Collaborative_Protege Collaborative Protege] and/or
[{{#var:pws}}/WebProtege WebProtege].

<div>

@@ Line 84: / Line 84: @@
 {{#var:Pr3}} and {{#var:Pr4}} are desktop applications.
 If your effort will be collaborative,
 you may want to investigate

Pr4 UG mi Selection - Revision history

JenniferVendetti: removed incorrect comment that protege doesn't support multi-user editing

RichMorin: Automated import of articles