OWL Web Ontology Language Reference Editorial Comments

The OWL Reference document is very solid and helpful.

 

The only general comment I have is that the reference document
occasionally refers to "triples".  It the document consistently referred
to axioms and statements, many readers would not have to apply RDF
knowledge of triples to understand the content of the document.  There
are very few mentions of "triples" (e.g., 3.1.2, 7.1, 8.3), so I think
this would be a minor fix.

 

I would like to offer a few nit picky comments to support the final
editing review:

 

Section 3, NOTE beginning "If one provides", typo, change "enumerattion"
to "enumeration"

 

Section 3.2.1, first paragraph, typo, change "than" to "then"

 

Section 3.2.1, last paragraph, recommend changing "has a librettist" to
"has at least one librettist".  The "a" suggests a cardinality of 1,
instead of a mincardinality of 1.

 

Section 3.2.2, NOTE beginning "OWL DL", appears to suggest that in OWL
Lite a property restriction could be the subject of an
owl:equivalentClass statement, and I thought it could only be the
object.

 

Section 3.2.3, paragraph beginning "This class axiom", I believe you
meant to say "second example" instead of "first example"

 

Section 3.2.4, Man example, I believe a "Man" should be "#Man" since
it's an "about" attribute

 

Section 3.2.4, MusicDrama example, I believe a "MusicDrama" should be
"#MusicDrama" since it's an "about" attribute

 

Section 4, paragraph beginning "An object property are" should be "An
object property is"

 

Section 4.1.3, last NOTE, suggests a singular use of rdfs:range, while
multiple statements are allowed, recommend changing wording to
"...descriptions allowed as objects of rdfs:range are class names"

 

Section 4.3.1, paragraph starting "The following", change "person" to
"woman"

 

Section 5.1, paragraph starting "The example", change "with as datatype
the" to "with the"

 

Section 7.1, Annotation properties aren't very well defined in any of
the OWL documents.

 

Section 7.1., MusicDrama example, I believe a "MusicDrama" should be
"#MusicDrama" since it's an "about" attribute

 

Section 7.2, type, change "so may" to "so it may"

 

Section 7.4.3, seems to be inconsistent with section 6 of the OWL Guide
because the Guide says not to assume backward compatibility and this
section seems to suggest that compatibility can be assumed for 2
versions

 

Section 7.4.5, it's unclear in the example whether we need to explicitly
state that Car is an OWL class since DeprecatedClass is a subclass of
rdfs:Class and not owl:Class; similarly for the hasDriver property, do
we need to explicitly state as an owl:ObjectProperty since
DeprecatedProperty is a subclass of rdf:Property?

 

Appendix A, versionItem should link to section 6 of the OWL Guide

 

Appendix B, recommend providing versionInfo as a typedLiteral using
&xsd#date datatype in Ontology header 

 

Appendix B, shouldn't we explicitly state that the inverseOf property is
symmetric?

 

Appendix C, isn't the domain and range of versionInfo owl:Thing?
Nothing is stated in the table

 

Appendix D, aren't OntologyProperty, AnnotationProperty, and DataRange
new since DAML+OIL?

 

I hope these comments/suggestions help!

 

Lee