To support the reuse and combination of ontologies in Semantic Web applications, it is often necessary to obtain smaller ontologies from existing larger ontologies. In particular, applications may require the omission of many terms, e.g., concept names and role names, from an ontology. However, the task of omitting terms from an ontology is challenging because the omission of some terms may aff...

Applications of description logics (DLs) such as OWL 2 and ontologybased data access (OBDA) require understanding of how to pose database queries over DL knowledge bases. While there have been many studies regarding traditional relational query formalisms such as conjunctive queries and their extensions, little attention has been paid to graph database queries, despite the fact that graph datab...

Recent research in the area of ontology representation for the Semantic Web has led to several different language proposals. Among the others, it led to the standardization of OWL, on one hand, and to the emergence of the DL-Lite family of Description Logics, on the other hand. These two outcomes mainly differ on their objective: while OWL aims to be a standard, and as such, it is tailored towa...

The Web Ontology Language (OWL) defines three classes of documents: Lite, DL and Full. All RDF/XML documents are OWL Full documents, some OWL Full documents are also OWL DL documents, and some OWL DL documents are also OWL Lite documents. This paper discusses parsing and species recognition – that is the process of determining whether a given document falls into the OWL Lite, DL or Full class. ...

A simple instance store allows descriptions of objects in terms of concept terms from a DL model and retrieval of those objects through concept queries. It is not a full A-box, as relationships between objects are not represented.