W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > April 2003

QA Review of owl-semantics

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 16:14:21 -0400
Message-Id: <a05200f02bad5de373280@[10.0.1.3]>
To: public-webont-comments@w3.org

Dear OWL WG,

This is the QA Review on the following document

OWL Web Ontology Language
Semantics and Abstract Syntax
W3C Working Draft 31 March 2003
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-semantics-20030331/


The review is on the Web:
	http://www.w3.org/QA/2003/04/QA-Rev-owl-semantics-all

General Comments

These comments do not relate to the QA Spec Guidelines specifically, 
but have been made when evaluating and reading the OWL Semantics 
Specification. You can ignore them if you choose to do it.

Metanames
     use meta name in your code source
Acronyms
     use acronym with a title to explain your acronym
Style/Level
     In the introduction, you talked about "several styles of OWL", 
when it seems to be level.
Illustration
     It may be interesting for the reader to have a graphics of what 
you have explained in the introduction. From the reading, it doesn't 
"jump at your face" what you really mean.
Clarity of expression and presentation

     Often your specification will gain by establishing a clearer 
language. Your text if often too crowded and it makes difficult to 
articulate the concepts.
-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 19:50:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:28 GMT