[Response] To Jonathan Rees Re: Editorial comments on RDF-based semantics

Dear Jonathan,

Thank you for your message
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0068.html>
on one of the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language working drafts.

Some of your comments in the message relate to the use 
of "OWL 2", "OWL 2 DL", and "OWL 2 Full". These comments 
are being addressed in another reply. This response 
addresses only your comments about specific editorial 
concerns with the RDF-Based Semantics document. 

As a general note, please be aware that the RDF-Based Semantics 
is not yet a Last Call working draft, and it has been 
considerably edited since the last publication in December.
In particular, the two sections you refer to have both changed
significantly since then. Several further changes are planned due
to your feedback (see below).

In the next release of the document, the first paragraphs of the 
introduction section are planned to be more clear about the purpose 
of the document. In particular, it is intended to explicitly 
state that the document specifies a semantics for arbitrary 
RDF graphs. The working group does, however, not intend to 
change the title of the document.

It is intended to not use the name "OWL 2 Full" anymore for 
the semantics only. Instead, it is planned to consistently 
refer to the semantics by the term "OWL 2 RDF-Based Semantics".

The text saying that "the semantics given here is the 
OWL 2 semantic extension of RDFS" is planned to be replaced 
by other text of a different form, which will hopefully not 
lead to confusion anymore. You are invited to comment on the 
new version of the text, when the document is re-published.

Concerning the mentioned redundancy of the word "semantic" 
in the term "semantic meaning", the working group will leave 
it to the editor of the document to decide about following 
your proposed editorial changes.

In the next publication, the introduction is intended to not 
saying anymore that the semantics "accepts" RDF graphs. Also, 
in that version the term "well-formed RDF graphs" is intended
to be removed. The phrase "include and extend" is also planned 
to be replaced.

The text talking about "the RDF syntax of OWL 2" is planned 
to be changed to talk about the "RDF encodings of all 
OWL 2 language constructs" instead. You are invited to comment 
on the new version of the text again when the document is 
re-published.

Section 0.3 of the RDF Semantics specification [RDF Semantics] 
talks about an RDF graph as a "set of RDF triples", and so does
Section 6.2 of the RDF Concepts specification [RDF Concepts].
In the next release of the document, an explicit note on this
is planned.

It is intended to not use the term "RDFS universe" in 
the document anymore. The term "the OWL 2 Full universe" was 
chosen, because Section 5 of the OWL Semantics and 
Abstract Syntax specification [OWL 1 SAS] talks about 
"the OWL universe". However, talking about "the" universe 
is probably confusing. In the next publication, this is
planned to be changed.

Concerning section 6, please note that this section has 
been in a very preliminary state at the time of the last 
publication. You are invited to comment on the new version 
of the section again, when the document is re-published.

[RDF Concepts]  <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/>
[RDF Semantics] <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/>
[OWL 1 SAS]     <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/>

This is a response to a Non-LC comment. If you
want to let us know whether or not you are 
satisfied with the working group's response 
to your comment, please send your answer to
<mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to 
this email should suffice). 

Regards,
Michael Schneider
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group