- From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:51:56 +0100
- To: OWL 2 <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Abdallah El-Ali <abdallah.elali@gmail.com>
Hi, Some corrections and comments from a co-worker of mine who decided to read the Syntax document (without me forcing him to!). -Rinke Begin forwarded message: > From: "Abdallah El Ali" <abdallah.elali@gmail.com> > Date: 28 oktober 2008 16:46:41 GMT+01:00 > To: "Rinke Hoekstra" <hoekstra@uva.nl> > Subject: OWL2 syntax doc check > > > Hi Rinke, > > Here are my comments on the 'Structural Specification and Functional- > Style Syntax' document for OWL 2 found on the OWL WG wiki site. > > Typographic errors: > > 1) Section 8.3.2: Typo > > In second example, line 5 of explanation: "For exmaple" --> "For > example" > > 2) Section 9.1: Missing Boldface > > In first line, "SubClassOf" --> "SubClassOf" (bold) > > 3) Section 9.1.2: Typo > > In second example, line 3 of explanation: "SubClassOf > ( a:MongrelOwner a:DowOwner )" --> "SubClassOf ( a:MongrelOwner > a:DogOwner )" > > 4) Section 9.2.9 & 9.2.10: Typos > > Natural language explanation of axioms use "themself" when it should > be "themselves" or less commonly "theirself". > > 5) Section 11.1: Typo > > In the example, in before the last line of explanation: > "...a:hasBiologicalFather is a simple" --> "...a:hasBiologicalFather > is simple" > > Conceptual errors: > > 1) Section 9.2.9: > > The example provided to illustrate the usage of reflexive properties > is missing an axiom along the lines of "PropertyAssertion( a:knows > a:Peter a:Lois )" > > 2) Section 11.2: > > In the fourth example, the example provided for the equivalence > assertion starts with "ClassAssertion(SomeValuesFrom..." - I think > it should be "ClassExpression(SomeValuesFrom..." as a logical > expression is being provided. > > > --- > > Finally, I second what you said earlier: while the examples in > section 11 (Global Restrictions on Axioms) make sense, I got quite > confused with the corresponding explanations, but I would blame this > in part on my lack of mathematical rigor - e.g., what are closure > axioms?? Are they axioms to ensure the reasoner does not go out of > hand such as during an encounter with cyclical structures? > > Cheers, > > Abdo > ----------------------------------------------- Drs. Rinke Hoekstra Email: hoekstra@uva.nl Skype: rinkehoekstra Phone: +31-20-5253499 Fax: +31-20-5253495 Web: http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke Leibniz Center for Law, Faculty of Law University of Amsterdam, PO Box 1030 1000 BA Amsterdam, The Netherlands -----------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 15:52:33 UTC