![](bg4.png)
of ontologies. Each one has its techniques and
principles. However, it should be noted that, no
matter which methodology is adopted, knowledge
specialists should always think about reuse concepts
from other ontologies.
The evaluation of OntologyJam, made during its
certification phase by final users has left important
insights that will be considered for the future
enhancements of the software tool, as they represent
indicate improvements that the tool needs to perform
its functionalities more appropriately.
In relation to functionalities, the search function
was the one that had the lowest evaluation, which is
due to the way in which the search is done.
OntologyJam conducts the search based on the
comparison of texts, with simple differentiation
between higher and lower case letters, without
taking into account the semantics of the terms, for
example, radicals, synonyms and hyper-synonyms.
Ideally, this search should be conducted using
adequate algorithms. This way, the final result
would be more explicit and efficient.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The development of this project was based on the
reuse of the concepts already defined in other
ontologies with the objective of aiding knowledge
specialists in the first steps of creating an ontology.
The result was the development of a tool that aids
not only in reuse, but also in sharing, management
and creation of a single meaning for knowledge.
OntologyJam was tested by people with
knowledge of ontologies and together with the tests,
it was proposed that a questionnaire be filled out
with the purpose of obtaining an evaluation of all
functionalities, the icons, the navigation and the
results presented by the tool through a critical view
of the users.
The results of the questionnaire were very
positive, again exceeding expectations. Therefore,
the conclusion that can be reached is that
OntologyJam will be well accepted by the majority
of users, as a useful everyday tool for knowledge
specialists.
The main contribution of this project is a specific
tool for reuse concepts from other ontologies; a need
have not been attended to by IT yet. However, the
conclusion of this project is far from meeting all the
needs of the ontology creation process.
The experiences acquired during this project,
new ways will be opened for the implementation of
the new tools that can meet all the needs of
knowledge specialists. The integration of these tools
based on existing methodologies will enable new
domains of knowledge to be mapped in new
ontologies in a much easier way.
REFERENCES
Bechhofer Sean, Harmelen Frank, Hendler Jim, Horrocks
Ian Mcguinness Deborah, Patel-Schneider Peter e
Stein Lynn “OWL Web Ontology Language
Reference”, W3C Recommendation, 2004
Borst, Willem Nico, “Construction of Engineering
Ontologies”, University of Tweenty. Thesis Enschede,
The Netherlands - Centre for Telematica and
Information Technology, 1997.
Bruijin de Jos, “Using Ontologies, Enabling Knowledge
Sharing and Reuse on the Semantic Web”, DERI
(Digital Enterprise Research Institute), 2003
Ding Li, Finin Tim, Joshi Anupam, Peng Yun, Cost Scott,
Sachs Joel, PAN Rong, Reddivari Pavan e Doshi
Vishal, “Swoogle: A Semantic Web Search and
Metadata Engine”, Department of Computer Science
and Electronic Engineering University of Maryland
Baltimore County, 2004
Gomez-Pérez Assunción, Fernandez Mariano, Pazos Juan
e Pazos Alejandro "Building a Chemical Ontology
Using Methodology and the Ontolofy Design
Environment" 1999, pp. 37-45.
Gomez-Pérez Assunción, Fernandez Mariano e Juristo
Natalia, "Methontology: From Ontological Art
towards Ontological Engineering" Proc. AAAI Spring
Symp. Series, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, Calif., 1997,
pp. 33-40.
Gruber, Thomas “Toward Principles for the Design of
Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing”, Stanford
Knowledge Systems Laboratory, 1992
Gruber, Thomas, “A Translation approach to portable
ontology specification” Knowledge Acquisition, Vol.5
(2):199-200, Stanford University 1993.
Grüninger, M., Fox, M. S. “Methodology for the design
and evaluation of ontologies”, In: IJCAI95 Workshop
on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing,
Montreal, Canada, 1995.
Smith Michael, Welty Chris e McGuinness “OWL Web
Ontology Language Guide”, W3C Recommendation,
2004, available in:
Sure York, Staab Steffen e Studer Rudi "On-To-
Knowledge Methodology (OTKM)", 2001.
Sure York e Studer Rudi "On-To-Knowledge Methodology
- Final Version", University of Karlsruhe, 2002.
Staab Steffen, Studer Rudi, Schnurr Hans-Peter e Sure
York, "Knowledge Process and Ontologies", IEEE
Intelligent Systems, vol. 16, No. 1, January/February,
2001.
Uschold, M. e Gruninger, M. “Ontologies: Principles,
Methods and Applications”, 1996, Knowledge
Engineering Review.
ICSOFT 2010 - 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies
486