<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>ClickOn : An Editor for DL-Lite A Ontology Design</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Albstadt-Sigmaringen University</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Business and Computer Science Jakobstrasse 6, 72458 Albstadt</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="DE">Germany</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Michael Wolters</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>German Nemirovski, and Andreas Nolle</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>In recent years a lot of e ort has been put into research dealing with accessing relational data with the help of ontologies. Solutions related to this issue focus on the Ontology-based Data Access (ODBA) architecture. Therefore the family of DL-Lite formalisms and in particular DL-LiteA has been developed to enable ontology design for e cient processing of conjunctive queries targeting a large amount of data stored in relational data bases. However, due to strong limitations and the comparatively high complexity of constructs comprised by DL-LiteA, it can be quite a challenging task to design ontologies which are based on this formalism. This paper presents an editor for DL-LiteA ful lling ontology design. Thanks to its features, such as automated generation of axioms, on-the- y inferring and graphical representation of relations between concepts, the editor simpli es the design process and improves the quality of the resulting ontologies signi cantly. The application and evaluation of the editor in two projects on data and knowledge integration for energy saving and urban planning con rmed these advantages.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Ontology Editor</kwd>
        <kwd>Ontology Design</kwd>
        <kwd>Ontology Engineering</kwd>
        <kwd>DL-LiteA</kwd>
        <kwd>Graphical Representation</kwd>
        <kwd>Inferring</kwd>
        <kwd>Ontology based Data Access (OBDA)</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Visualization and GUI based editing of formal ontologies have been central to
various projects since the introduction of the term ontology in the engineering
and technological disciplines by Gruber [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. After some time of evolving and
proving to be competent with other systems the editor Protege de facto became
standard tool for ontology design. Yet, at least since the introduction of OWL
2 and OWL 2 pro les (OWL 2 QL, OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 RL) by the W3C
consortium the limitations of available tools, including Protege editor, became
evident. Basically we have identi ed two challenges that have arisen in this
context. Both of them concern validation or control of user input.
      </p>
      <p>At rst, when designing an ontology which has to follow the syntax declared
in one of the OWL pro les or in one of the DL logics like AL, SHOIN ,SHIQ,
E L etc., the programming environment (i.e. ontology editor) should support
the designer by taking these syntactical restrictions into account. The designer
should be noti ed if a speci cation of an ontology element is not aligning with
the de nition of the selected pro le or logic; for example if such speci cation
uses a construct that is not available in the selected logic. Alternatively the
environment should support only those constructs that are de ned within the
selected pro le or logic, i.e. the GUI available for a designer must not contain
constructs which aren't de ned.</p>
      <p>However, the grammar control of the ontology designer is only one challenging
aspect. The second task concerns on-the- y validation of semantics. Though, this
issue appears to be more di cult to address since it requires on-the- y reasoning,
the degree of complexity and response time depends on the properties of the
selected logic and the ontology being edited. In spite of the expected di culties
concerning the realization of these features, this demand seems to be just natural.
Analogous to that in the area of software engineering, on-the- y code validation
belongs to the state of the art in this eld and is implemented in numerous IDEs,
such as eclipse1.</p>
      <p>In this paper we present the ontology editor ClickOnA, that implements an
approach addressing two challenges mentioned above, i.e. taking into account
the constructors and syntax available in a particular description logic (to be
precise it is DL-LiteA) during the execution design/editing operations. The
DLLite family and in particular DL-LiteA has been developed as a fundamental
element of the Ontology-based Data Access (ODBA) architecture to facilitate
ontology design for e cient processing of conjunctive queries targeting a large
amount of data stored in relational data bases.</p>
      <p>ClickOnA has been applied for the project SEMANCO2 (Semantic Tools for
Carbon Reduction in Urban Planning) focusing on implementation of analytic
and data management services for carbon reduction in urban planning. Due to
its features, such as automated generation of axioms, on-the- y inferring and
graphical representation of relations between concepts, ClickOnA provides an
extremely e cient -in terms of editing and evaluation time - environment for
ontology design.</p>
      <p>This paper is structured as follows: Chapter 3 outlines how DL-LiteA
speci c aspects are applied in ClickOnA. The next chapter explains its features,
like cooperative design, on-the- y inferring and advantages in ontology
visualization. Implementation details of the editor including the applied frameworks
are introduced in section 5. In the following chapter an evaluation is described
which proves the high e ciency of ClickOnA compared to conventional ontology
editors.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>1 http://www.eclipse.org/</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2 The SEMANCO project is being carried out with the support of the Seventh Frame</title>
      <p>work Programme \ICT for Energy Systems" 2011-2014, under the grant agreement
Number 287534.</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Related Work</title>
        <p>
          Comparative studies for ontology design tools are provided in Khondoker [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ]
and in Kapoor and Sharma [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ]. Descriptions of particular tools such as Protege,
WebODE and OntoEdit can be found in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ], [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ], and [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ] respectively.
        </p>
        <p>
          Though the methodology issue is not re ected in this paper, it is
important to understand that application of these tools brings maximal e ect in the
context of a particular methodology, where they are supplemented by process
descriptions, templates and other tools. The methodical approach called Data
Integration Driven Ontology Design, in whose context the ClickOnA editor has
been developed and its application is described in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ]. Some of the most recent
methodical approaches are described in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ] and [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
          ].
        </p>
        <p>
          As stated above the ClickOnA editor has been developed to design ontologies
on the basis of the DL-LiteA formalism, which belongs to the DL-Lite family
of description logics. Another two logics of this family, DL-LiteF and DL-LiteR
were described by Calvanese et al. in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
          ]. One year later Poggi et al. published the
paper about DL-LiteA [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ]. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
          ] and [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
          ] describe principles of query answering
using DL-Lite ontologies and the DL-Lite capable reasoner Quest.
3
        </p>
        <p>
          DL-LiteA support by ClickOnA
In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ] DL-LiteA is referred as the Description Logic of the DL-Lite familiy that
is closest to OWL 2.0. It is a compromise between the maximum expressiveness
of the ontology speci cation language and the optimal time performance when
processing conjunctive queries referring to elements of ontologies speci ed using
this language. Typically these are ABox queries which are aiming at
collecting data properties related to speci c individuals and stored in relational data
sources.
        </p>
        <p>Regarding OWL 2 the two most important aspects of DL-LiteA are on the
one hand a restriction that allows range/domain speci cations for functional
properties only by connecting concepts with data types. On the other hand, for
non-functional properties connecting two concepts, domain and range have to
be modeled through axioms using \owl:Restriction". For example the following
axioms use subsumption (v), existence quanti cation (9) and inversion ( ) to
express the fact that the concept Land Vehicle relates to the class Wheel via the
hasWheel property.</p>
        <sec id="sec-3-1-1">
          <title>9hasW heel v Land V ehicle</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-3-1-2">
          <title>9hasW heel v W eel</title>
          <p>(1)
(2)</p>
          <p>In RDF/XML these statements are speci ed as follows:
&lt;owl:Restriction&gt;
&lt;rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource=".../clickOnA.owl#Wheel"/&gt;
&lt;owl:onProperty&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description&gt;</p>
          <p>&lt;owl:inverseOf rdf:resource=".../clickOnA.owl#hasWheel"/&gt;
&lt;/rdf:Description&gt;
&lt;/owl:onProperty&gt;
&lt;owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="...org/2002/07/owl#Thing"/&gt;
&lt;/owl:Restriction&gt;
and
&lt;owl:Restriction&gt;
&lt;rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource=".../clickOnA.owl#Land_Vehicle"/&gt;
&lt;owl:onProperty rdf:resource=".../clickOnA.owl#hasWheel"/&gt;
&lt;owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="....org/2002/07/owl#Thing"/&gt;
&lt;/owl:Restriction&gt;</p>
          <p>In fact if axioms are speci ed in this style, domains and ranges of the
corresponding properties can be inferred by a reasoner software. ClickOnA was
implemented to infer ranges and domains from axioms coded this way, converts
them into a graphical presentation and thus hides the complex code from the
user (Figure 1).
Apart from interpretation and graphical representation of axiomatically
speci ed domains and ranges, ClickOnA allows generation and modi cation of
existing axioms. Here as well, the user designs without the complex axiomatic
nature of the speci cation and invokes corresponding operations by selection
of a context menu option, as shown in gure 2. Code that strictly aligns with
the regulations of DL-LiteA is generated automatically. The editor's on-the- y
reasoning functionality enables that this code is interpreted as domain/range
speci cations.</p>
          <p>De ning DL-LiteA conform code as shown above is probably the biggest
problem when a conventional ontology editor like Protege3 is used. To
specify one domain/range pair users have to switch between three di erent
subwindows: \class description", \object property hierarchy" and \general class</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>3 http://protege.stanford.edu/</title>
      <p>axioms". When a high number of suchlike relations have to be speci ed, errors
are almost inevitable.
4</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Usability and e ective authoring</title>
        <p>Furthermore ClickOnA implements a set of features aiming at high usability and
e ectiveness of the authoring/design process. These features basically are
{ Partitioning of the complex editing task into a group of smaller and simpler
tasks
{ Advanced ontology visualization, and support of user navigation along the
ontology graph
4.1</p>
        <p>Partitioning of the editing task
ClickOnA considers the editing process as a combination of three sub-processes:
i) editing of a subsumption taxonomy; ii) editing of a non-subsumption
properties graph and iii) annotation of concepts. Correspondingly, three di erent
perspectives, presented in the screen simultaneously are o ered for users: the
taxonomy perspective ( gure 3, left), the properties graph ( gure 3, right), and
the meta data perspective ( gure 3, upper part).</p>
        <p>In the middle column between the taxonomy perspective and the properties
graph there is a control panel that can be moved horizontally, enlarging one of
the perspectives to the left or to the right side. The advantages of this visual
structure become evident when ClickOnA is used on a system with two monitors.
In this case one monitor can be dedicated to each of these two perspectives.</p>
        <p>A new concept can be created either in the taxonomy perspective or in the
properties graph. In the former case this is done using the context menu, when
the concept that is supposed to be subsumed by a new one is clicked with the
right mouse button. In the property graph, new concepts can be created through
a context menu as well. In this case however, instead of a new concept, a new
property relation speci ed by a set of axioms, has to be created as described
in section 3. The label for this property is generated automatically. New
concepts added in the property graph are initially subsuming the concept called
Suspense, which is automatically generated by ClickOnA as root of a
temporary sub-taxonomy. Later, concepts subsuming Suspense are relocated in the
taxonomy to a more suitable place.</p>
        <p>Moreover, the meta data perspective (see gure 4) o ers several elds for a
concept's metadata. The elds \Comment", \Author", \Reference" and \Label"
can be modi ed. Other elds contain values generated by the system. The initial
value of the \Author" eld is generated automatically depending on user settings.</p>
        <p>Ontology visualization and navigation support
To achieve high usability and optimized ontology authoring it is important that
users are able to navigate through both inferred graphs (taxonomy and the
properties graph) in a most natural and transparent way. In this context ClickOnA
o ers the following settings that are shown on the control panel displayed in the
middle of gure 3.</p>
        <p>{ All nodes of the ontology graph are colored with regard to their meaning
(the legend on the control panel explains the di erent colors)
{ Mouse click navigation: After a concept is clicked on with the left mouse
button it is going to be centered on the screen and relations originating from
the corresponding graph node and (optionally) form its sub nodes become
visible (see node Compactness Ratio in gure 5). Double clicking on a node
results in a new tree presentation where the selected concept becomes the
root of a taxonomy. (see node CS Geometry in gure 5)
{ Enlarging or collapsing parts of the ontology graph by a zoom function
{ Controlling the tree depth (one, two or three levels can be displayed
simultaneously)
{ Changing graph direction from e. g. left to right or bottom down
{ Forward and backward navigation within a selection history</p>
        <p>Additional navigation options can be found in the meta data perspective.
There, all super- and sub-concepts of a selected node are listed. By clicking
on one of them the editor navigates to the corresponding root node. Besides,
the ontology editor o ers a powerful option for searching concepts using
autocomplete functionalities. If only a part of a concept name is entered by the user
the system o ers him a list of concept names containing the entered part (see
gure 6).</p>
        <p>In the current version of the ClickOnA editor is able to import and export
ontologies as .owl les using the RDF/XML format.
Implementation of ClickOnA has been carried out on the basis of a Java Swing
graphical user interface and using basically three frameworks: Prefuse4, Apache
Jena5 and JDOM 6. The Prefuse framework expands the Java 2D graphic library
and can easily be integrated into any Java Swing software. The functionalities of
Prefuse are used in ClickOnA to display graphs of concepts and relations. The
Apache Jena framework o ers a lot of tools and libraries for reading, processing
and writing RDF data in XML; for dealing with OWL ontologies and for
rulebased reasoning. JDOM is an open source Java-based document object model
for XML. In the ClickOnA JDOM is used to manage (access and modify) les
written in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), whereby the OWL is a derivate
of the XML, de ned by means of a set of name spaces.
6</p>
        <p>
          Evaluation of DL-LiteA capabilities of ontology editors
The available evaluations of ontology editors (for example [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
          ]) focus basically
on usability or language support (in terms of RDF, OWL, XML, etc.). So these
cannot be helpful in an assessment of DL-Lite support provided (or not provided)
by di erent tools.
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>4 http://prefuse.org/</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>5 http://jena.apache.org/</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>6 http://www.jdom.org/</title>
      <p>The advantages of ClickOnA for editing DL-LiteA conform ontologies can be
illustrated by a comparison of design processes carried out with ClickOnA and
with di erent conventional ontology editors. The editors used for this
evaluation are: ClickOnA, Protege 4.2, NeoOn Toolkit 2.5.27, OntoStudio 3.2.08, Hozo
5.2.369, OWLGrEd 1.6.010 and TopBraid Composer 4.2.111.</p>
      <p>This evaluation was carried out by three ontology experts. Taking into
account that the ClickOnA editor is designed especially for domain experts an
evaluation with participants of this group would most probably show a much
higher di erence between the process time results, in favor of ClickOnA.</p>
      <p>First the process of creating a new, tiny ontology containing 8 concepts has
been evaluated. In the second step three properties with axiomatically de ned
ranges and domains were speci ed. The third step aimed at presentation of
information inferred from axioms created in the previous step. The results of
this evaluation regarding the duration of these three processes are displayed in
the following table:</p>
      <p>Besides ClickOnA only Protege was able to create the axioms required by the
DL-LiteA formalism. The creation of new ontology concepts using ClickOnA
results in a slightly longer time span because of its current implementation whereby
renaming of newly created concepts requires an additional mouse click compared
to the other editors. In Protege users have to enter two axioms (see section 2) for
each relation manually, whereas ClickOnA generates these fully automatically.
On-the- y inferring supported by ClickOnA enables immediate graphic
presentation of relations created in the second process (line 3 in the table above). When</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>7 http://neon-toolkit.org/wiki/Main Page</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>8 http://www.semafora-systems.com/de/produkte/ontostudio/</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>9 http://www.hozo.jp/</title>
      <p>10 http://owlgred.lumii.lv/index.html
11 http://www.topquadrant.com/products/TB Composer.html
using Protege, at rst a reasoner, for example Fact++, has to be executed
before any inferred information can be shown to the user. Unlike ClickOnA Protege
isn't able to present this information graphically but only as additional textual
description of a selected property ( gure 7).</p>
      <p>However the advantages of ClickOnA become evident when the size of the
ontology to be edited grows. Comfortable navigation instruments o er perfect
orientation, save time and reduce the number of errors signi cantly.
7</p>
      <sec id="sec-10-1">
        <title>Conclusion</title>
        <p>In this paper we have presented an innovative ontology editor. ClickOnA is
dedicated to the design of ontologies basing on the DL-LiteA formalism. Due
to its restrictive architecture application of DL-LiteA may lead to an increasing
complexity of the ontology code. In this context real time evaluation of user input
becomes essential. Due to on-the- y inferring, powerful graphical presentation
and control options ClickOnA is able to give very expressive and illustrative
feedback to the user, immediately after his input. Furthermore graphical widgets
enable automated rapid and error-free generating of complex axioms, and o er
a high level of usability. In the nearest future ClickOnA will be enhanced by
mechanisms for versioning, user and change management.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gruber</surname>
          </string-name>
          , T.:
          <article-title>Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: International Journal of Human Computer Studies</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>43</volume>
          (
          <issue>5</issue>
          {6), pp.
          <volume>907</volume>
          {
          <fpage>928</fpage>
          . ELSEVIER, (
          <year>1995</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Khondoker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mueller</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Comparing Ontology Development Tools Based on an Online Survey</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vol. I WCE</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>2010</year>
          , London (
          <year>2010</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kapoor</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sharma</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Comparative Study Ontology Building Tools for Semantic Web Applications</article-title>
          .
          <source>International journal of Web &amp; Semantic Technology (IJWesT)</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>1</volume>
          ,
          <issue>Num</issue>
          .3. (
          <year>2010</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Arprez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Corcho</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fernndez-Lpez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gmez-Prez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>WebODE: a scalable workbench for ontological engineering</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings K-CAP '01 Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Knowledge capture</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>6</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>13</lpage>
          . ACM New York (
          <year>2001</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Surez-Figueroa</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gmez-Prez</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Motta</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gangemi.</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Ontology Engineering in a Networked World. Springer, Berlin (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nemirovski</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nolle</surname>
          </string-name>
          . A.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sicilia</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ballarini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Corrado</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Data Integration Driven Ontology Design, Case Study Smart City</article-title>
          . In: SemCity Wokshop, Madrid (accepted paper) (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fernandes</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.C.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Guizzardi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.S.S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Guizzardi</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.:
          <article-title>Using Goal Modeling to Capture Competency Questions in Ontology-based Systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Information and Data Management</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>2</volume>
          , No 3, pp.
          <fpage>527</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>540</lpage>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fonou-Dombeu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Huisman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Combining Ontology Development Methodologies and Semantic Web Platforms for E-government Domain Ontology Development</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Web and Semantic Technology (IJWesT)</source>
          Vol.
          <volume>2</volume>
          , No.
          <volume>2</volume>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calvanese</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giacomo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lembo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lenzerini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rosati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Tractable reasoning and e cient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Automated Reasoning</source>
          <volume>39</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ), pp.
          <fpage>385</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>429</lpage>
          . Springer, New York (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Poggi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          et al:
          <article-title>Linking Data to Ontologies</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal on Data Semantics</source>
          , X, pp.
          <fpage>133</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>173</lpage>
          . Springer, Heidelberg (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rodriguez-Muro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calvanese</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>High Performance Query Answering over DL-Lite Ontologies</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proc. of the 13th Int. Conf. on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning</source>
          . pp.
          <fpage>308</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>318</lpage>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rodriguez-Muro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calvanese</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Quest, an OWL 2 QL Reasoner for Ontology-Based Data Access</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proc. of the 9th Int. Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED</source>
          <year>2012</year>
          ),
          <article-title>CEUR-WS.org (</article-title>
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alatrish</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E. S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : Comparision of Ontology Editors.
          <source>e-RAF Journal on Computing</source>
          , Vol.
          <volume>4</volume>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Corona</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Di Pasquale</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Poggi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ruzzi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Savo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D. F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>When DL-Lite met OWL</article-title>
          ...
          <article-title>(extended abstract)</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proc. of OWLED</source>
          <year>2008</year>
          ,
          <article-title>CEUR-WS.org (</article-title>
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>