functional style syntax

At the risk of ticking off the less RDF inclined in the group (for  
which I sincerely apologize in advance) but in the interest of  
perhaps making OWL more accessible to the wider SW audience familiar  
with RDF, I wonder if we should consider some of the choices made in  
the functional syntax.

The sort of thing I have in mind are, for example:

Currently: PropertyAssertion( a:parentOf a:Peter a:Chris ) => a:Peter  
is a parent of a:Chris.

First, the order of argument would be more intuitive if it followed  
the S P O pattern that the triple takes, and it might even be worth  
calling this

Statement(a:Peter a:parentOf a:Chris) to maximize the parallel

Similarly, we have now

ClassAssertion( a:Person a:Peter )

This differs both from OWL 1, and from the common ordering. This  
could become

InstanceOf(a:Peter a:Person )

or

TypeAssertion(a:Peter a:Person)

There are other possibilities, but I won't include a complete review  
here. Rather I wanted to open up the subject to discussion.

I realize that one gets attached to names and that these changes  
might be viewed as unpleasant for some in the working group. So  
first, let me reassure that it is *not* my intention to offend.  
Rather I am hoping that despite an initial potential distaste WG  
members might consider this from the point of view of what might help  
get the broadest adoption of OWL.

Regards,
Alan