Blending rules and ontology in argumentation

It is good to know, but to know how to mix what you know is even better. We propose an argumentative manner for dealing with knowledge from different sources using different formalisms as ontologies and rules. Each of the involved formalisms are better as they are, without translating one to another, therefore our aim is to mix formalisms´ reasoning abilities without significant translations between them. We define two schemes for building arguments from both rules and ontology. The resulting argumentation network is visualized in an application meant not to make a decision, but to facilitate the human user in evaluating and assessing the interdependences between available knowledge.