The focus of the Protege team has typically been on creating a good
ontology editor that is as language agnostic as possible. As such, the
software is architected as a collection of plug-ins so that we can
develop new back-end plug-ins to support different languages as they
appear and/or become popular (OWL - for example).
Stuart Hendren wrote:
> I was wondering what you think Protege's stance should be on other ontology languages. Like KIF, for example. Or if anyone reading from the team could give me the official position on this.
This may be only peripherally related, but someone at the 2004 Protege
Conference presented a paper on importing the SUMO ontology (in KIF
format) into Protege:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologWorkshop_July_2004/ProtegeOntologWorkshop_2004_07_06#nidBPW > I was thinking along the lines of:
> Should Protege cover other languages like KIF or WSML or are frames and OWL only languages they will be supporting.
The default file-based format for the Protege-Frames editor is CLIPS,
but we are transitioning to XML - probably in the 3.3 beta series. We
don't have any immediate plans to write back-ends for KIF or WSML.
However, as I mentioned above, Protege is very extensible. The hooks
are in-place for users to write full-fledged back-end plug-ins for
formats of their choice. Or, even simpler, to write import/export
plug-ins to import/export snapshots of your ontology in formats of your
choice. More information about the difference between back-end and
import (also called "createproject") and export plug-ins is available on
our Web site:
If someone were to develop a plug-in for KIF or WSML, we would happily
link to this on our Wiki.
> If so, is this because of popularity, standards issues or some other reason?
Part of the reason is that we are a small team - so, resources are a bit
limited. We necessarily have to choose only those formats which seem to
be the most widely used and encourage our user community to submit
plug-ins for other types of languages/formats.