Difference Between Similar Terms and Objects

Difference Between RDF And OWL


In a review of the differences and similarities that RDF and OWL have, it is quite vital to do a thorough background to understand their uses. Both RDF and OWL are used by the Semantic web that comes in two layers. RDF refers to Resource Description Framework, which is a framework that is based on the web and helps in the representation of the online exchange of data. OWL on the other hand refers to Web Ontology Language, which is a language used in the web for the representation of ontologies.  Inasmuch as the functions that bind both OWL and RDF may seem to be similar, there are indeed differences that have been attributed to these two, and these differences and similarities in the functioning of these two technologies are discussed below.  Both of these two technologies are controlled under the Rule Interchange Format (RIF), a technology developed to help in the control of the different values of need over the web.

It is important to take note that wherever RDF is mentioned, it is a reference to the structure of data in hand and should not in any way relate to OWL. On the other hand, wherever OWL is mentioned, it only refers to semantic relationships that apply the common programming practices. In most cases OWL will employ the C structure.

The common use of RDF is to define additional structure to triples. Triples are the use of data normalization, applied in extreme circumstances. These triples can come from numerous sources, as a single database is being employed, and there’s no need for using reconfigurations.

The RDF Schema (which is used in reference to the legal use of different classes and relationships) is used when it comes to defining classes that are used in the representation of object, predicates and subjects. In this, it points out that it is possible to make statements about the different categories of RDF and the relationships between them as well.

RDF allows for the exportation of content in different formats, including RDF+XML and N3, which is a non-XML format.  The most common of the formats is RDF+XML, though it comes with its defects. The preferred choice is therefore N#, which is both easier to read, and comes with some subsets that are stricter, thus reducing shortcomings. It is always a good point to remember that RDF is an excellent way to work with Triples but is not a format on its own.

OWL, as mentioned earlier, deals with the web and thus adds semantics to the schema. A good point to note about it is that it allows for far more freedom with the allowance of specifying beyond the properties and classes.  OWL is also similar to RDF in that it is expressed in Triples.

Also unique in the use of OWL is that it allows you to talk about two things which are similar. The benefit of this is that it allows for joining of data that is located within different schemas. This is a great use as it allows for data that is located across numerous sites on the web can be joined. Finally, OWL can be used when an inference of implicit facts is required.


RDF refers to Resource Description Framework and OWL refers to Web Ontology Language

RDF used to define additional structure to Triples

The RDF Schema used for defining classes that are used in the representation of object, predicates and subjects

RDF allows for the exportation of content

OWL adds semantics to the schema giving more freedom

With OWL, you can talk about two similar things, and join similar data online

Sharing is caring!

Search DifferenceBetween.net :

Email This Post Email This Post : If you like this article or our site. Please spread the word. Share it with your friends/family.

Leave a Response

Please note: comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

Articles on DifferenceBetween.net are general information, and are not intended to substitute for professional advice. The information is "AS IS", "WITH ALL FAULTS". User assumes all risk of use, damage, or injury. You agree that we have no liability for any damages.

See more about : , ,
Protected by Copyscape Plagiarism Finder