Tutorial scope or [OEP]

Hi, 

First of all happy new year to all.

Here 2 definitions to illustrate my questions :


C = (and (all R P) (all R (not P) )
D= (and (all R P') (all R (at-most 4 S))

I have to admit that all the OWL newcomers and even people who have
already built some not only little academicals examples of OWL
ontologies to which i have showed such examples dont understand that :
		- C is satifiable (consistent ?)
		- D subsume C.
It'is very diificult to explain such (classification) results.

So my questions are ?

	1) do you think that "ordinary" people MUST be capable to
clearly explain themselves these examples or is this kind of case  
	only for experts of the domain (the member of this WG - not me
of course) ? The problem is that i can't find a "real life" (with
concrete classes names) to show that if, i don't understand this point i
could make some mistake in creating "real" ontologies. In other words is
the example - or the fact to not understand it -  the visible part of a
huge Iceberg or the symptom of a deeper incomprehension problem for
potentials mistakes in using OWL regularly 
	2) do you think that such points are covered by the tutorial
material in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/Tutorials ?
	3) do you think it is in the scope of the WG ?

Thanks a lot

Best regards 

Marco NANNI